library.word-life.orglibrary.word-life.org/subjects/apologetics/savonarola... · 2014-07-23 ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics i
James E Dainty
Mentor – Dr Johnson Philip
Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
1st November 2008
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
An examination of the Apologetic Purpose, Pretext and Argument in the
Teaching of Girolamo Savonarola (1452 – 1498) based on his writing –
The Triumph of the Cross
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I give thanks to God for all those who have helped and inspired me in the field of
Apologetics. Among them are some great thinkers and leaders of the 20th and 21st
Centuries, but also Savonarola from the 15th Century. I offer this thesis in the hope
that it might be an inspiration and resource for others.
My sincere thanks are offered to my wife, Angela and to my daughter-in-law, Marney
Dainty, for their editing and proof reading, and to my daughter Gillian and son Stephen
for their love and encouragement.
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my two best friends – my wife Angela and my „soul mate’
Bishop Ng Moon Hing, Bishop of West Malaysia
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
ii
ABSTRACT
Savonarola was a gifted preacher and thinker of the 15th Century. In his writings we
discover him to be a „Father of Apologetics’. His method and approach to the defence of
the Faith is superior to much of what is on offer today. His premises and purposes are
stated with clarity and match the needs and situation of the 21st Century as much as
they did those of his day. The needs he identified, still need to be addressed. The need
to –
Confirm the faith of people whose belief has been shaken
Prepare unbelievers for the reception of supernatural enlightenment,
Enable the faithful to refute the arguments of non-believers
Expose the irrationality of non-believers’ arguments so that simple and
uneducated people are released from the deception played on them.1
In his major work, The Triumph of the Cross, his sharp analytical mind and
comprehensive understanding created a totally original presentation of the philosophy of
Christianity. This was done with a simple appeal to natural reason. „Not that faith, the
spontaneous gift of God, can be acquired through reason,’ wrote Savonarola, ‘but
because reason is a useful weapon with which to combat unbelievers or open to them
the way of salvation. It is an instrument to arouse the lukewarm and give strength to the
faithful.’
He uses the motif of a triumphal chariot moving in celebration through the world. Seated
in the chariot is Christ, who was crucified but who is now claiming his kingdom.
Surrounding him are all those who have been affected by his victory. Saints and Martyrs,
people of every nation whose lives have been transformed as well as false religions and
philosophies, which have been vanquished. From this integrated and comprehensive
image – not based on isolated proofs – he provides a strong rational apologetic.
His method avoids the tendency of trying to prove an intelligent designer; unrelated to
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It avoids giving a Christian apologetic in a
way that avoids all association with the world‟s criticism of the Church and Christians.
And it deals with the weaknesses and loss of nerve that have characterised Apologetics
through much of the 20th Century. His teaching is not one among several apologetic
tools - but the key to unifying them all.
The concluding part of his work compares the Christian Worldview with the others of his
day and again we find a remarkable match with the competing explanations of life and
the universe, on offer today. His refuting of humanistic philosophies, astrology,
polytheistic religions, Judaism, Islam and Christian heresies and cults is equally effective
in addressing secular humanism, postmodernism, eastern religions, the New Age
movement, cults and the impact of Islam.
Some Apologetics take us to a first cause only; Savonarola takes us to the Cross of
Christ to meet the very Son of God as Saviour and Lord.
1 TOTC – Page 81
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
iii
MAJOR REFERENCE WORKS
The two major reference works which provide the most comprehensive and scholarly
biographies and evaluation of the influence of Savonarola are those by Pasquale Villari
and Pierre Van Paassen.
The Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola by Professor Pasquale Villari, was translated
from the Italian by Linda Villari and published in London by T. Fisher Unwin in 1888.
Pasquale Villari 1826–1917, was an Italian historian and statesman. He was Minister of
Education (1889–92). His work on Savonarola gained him an appointment (1859) as
teacher of modern history at Pisa. He also taught at Florence.
A Crown of Fire: The Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola was written by Pierre Van
Paassen and published by Scribner in New York in 1960.
FOOTNOTE CITATIONS
In the footnotes the citations from Savonarola‟s Triumph of the Cross are referenced as
TOTC. Those from The Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola are referenced as Villari
and those from A Crown of Fire are referenced as Paassen.
SUPPORTING TEXT – THE TRIUMPH OF THE CROSS
Reason for the Text
Because the text of The Triumph of the Cross is not available in English, I have produced
a revision and re-writing of the text based on John Proctor‟s translation from the Italian.
This is available for downloading or reading online at –
http://www.theologytools.com/
With this text I have also included an Introduction and background notes. Some parts of
that material are duplicated in this thesis, to enable each document to stand-alone; with
each as a complete entity.
Method in revising and rewriting
In order to maximize the benefit of this wonderful document I have made certain
updates to the language, grammar and style. This has been done in a manner that seeks
to preserve the author‟s original tone and message and to facilitate ease of
comprehension of complex arguments.
Where Savonarola uses more obscure technical terms or words, I have referred to the
Italian text and translated the word or phrase into current English usage. On the few
occasions when this has been necessary it has been done with the help of Italian
scholars and reference works, giving due weight to the 15th Century context of the
original work.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
iv
Where I have revised the wording of key ideas and technical words used by Savonarola,
this has been indicated in the footnotes provided. It has only been done for the sake of
clarity and never to change the thrust of an argument.
Dynamic Equivalence.
I have used dynamic equivalence to convey the author‟s meaning. This means that an
attempt is made to convey the overall life and power of the author‟s message, rather
than formal equivalence, which seeks to translate word for word. In formal equivalence,
the aim is to find a word with the equivalent force and meaning as the one being
translated. But this is not always possible as exact pairs of words are sometimes not
available. In dynamic equivalence, the focus is not so much on the individual words but
rather on the force and meaning of phrases or sentences. In doing this there is obviously
still a need to note the use of key words and technical terms used by the author. And on
one occasion, I have rearranged the order of the sentences in a paragraph to make the
author‟s argument explicit, for a modern reader.
Savonarola‟s Italian edition is written with each chapter composed of a single paragraph.
This makes intricate arguments even more complex. I have therefore divided the
chapters into paragraphs to clarify the different concepts presented and to stop them all
running into each other.
History of the text
Savonarola‟s passionate heart and acute intellect produced in The Triumph of the Cross,
one of the greatest works of Christian Apologetics. The work was first written2 in Latin
and printed in Florence in 1497, reprinted in 1524, then in Paris in the same year, then
Basle in 1540, in Lyon in 1633, in Grenoble in 1666.
However, as many citizens did not read Latin3 he translated it into Italian, saying that he
had not done this „word for word‟ but had changed some parts, omitted others and
added new material to make the sense clearer. His motive was to prevent anyone
deliberately mistranslating the book, at a time when his teaching was accused of being
filled with heresy. This Italian edition was also produced in 1497, in Florence and
reprinted in Venice in 1531 and again in 1547.
Even his enemies recognised the brilliance of this work, and after his death it was highly
2 His preaching was often loud and powerful, but his actual writing was very small and delicate. His personal Bible is on display in Florence and his closely written comments in the margins really
need the assistance of a magnifying glass to decipher them.
3 It is plain that there is no foundation for the belief expressed by some writers that Latin was commonly understood by the people at that period. But as it was the language of the learned classes throughout Europe, it was naturally employed in all theological and philosophical works, and all the more so because, in order to treat of these themes in Italian, it would have been requisite to coin new phrases and forms of speech, almost, indeed, to create a new language.
Accordingly it was found easier to write first in Latin, and then translate into the vulgar tongue. Villari - Book 1 Ch 8.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
v
regarded. In 1640 the brother of Pope Urban VIII, in his will, left his estate of 500 gold
crowns, to reprint this book and to show that Savonarola was innocent of heresy.
An incomplete edition translated from the Italian version, was printed in English in 1661,
by John Field and a copy of this is held at Cambridge University. This edition leaves out
sections but admits to doing so, to make the work more acceptable in a time of
Reformed Theology - a time when the Church of England was publishing the Thirty Nine
Articles, refuting Catholic dogma.
A more complete edition of The Triumph Of The Cross was published in English by
Hodder in London in 1868. This was a translation of the Latin text, by O'Dell Travers
Hill.4 However it is incomplete and the translator has deliberately left out whole chapters.
A précis of part of Travers Hill‟s work was circulated in a volume called Valiant for Truth
published in 1961.5
A further translation into English was made from the Italian text by Father John Proctor,
Provincial of the English Dominicans. This was published by Sands and Company, in
London, in 1901. It carried the imprimatur of the Archbishop of Westminster dated 28
March 1901.
The text I have revised and re-written is based on this full Italian translation by Fr John
Proctor. His work is valuable as the first complete English edition. Unfortunately its tone
clothes Savonarola in the style of a mid-Victorian cleric, which is unfair to the immediacy
of Savonarola‟s writing and unfortunate for us in the 21st Century because it makes the
reading more difficult.
Examples of Proctor‟s anachronistic style are the stilted use of the semi-colon, which
flood the text, his use of archaic words when adequate current ones were available, his
phrasing, and Scripture references, which are not in, recognised current formats.
His text also contains many very long sentences, which the modern reader finds
confusing. The difficulty arises when several clauses refer back to previous clauses within
the same sentence. To clarify the argument and make the meaning of the text more
explicit I have broken many of these sentences into smaller units.
It was necessary to provide a new text because the text in English is not readily
available. The Latin texts are now collectors‟ items6 and very few copies of the Hodder or
Sands English editions are extant. A new Italian edition was published in 2001 Il trionfo
della croce. La ragionevolezza della fede: „The Triumph of the Cross. The reasonableness
of faith‟ by Prof. Giorgio Carbone OP and published by Edizioni Studio Domenicano.
4 A copy is held by the British Library, London, UK
5 David Otis Fuller, Ed., VALIANT FOR THE TRUTH, A Treasury of Evangelical Writings, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961
6 In April 2008 a copy of the Venice Latin Edition of 1506 was on sale for $3,200. The catalogue stated - THIRD EDITION of Savonarola's confession of faith, begun in 1496 and printed in 1497, the year of Savonarola's excommunication. This edition is extremely rare. OCLC locates a single
copy in the United States.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgments
Dedication
Abstract
Major reference works
Supporting Text – THE TRIUMPH OF THE CROSS
a. Reason for the Text
b. Method in revising and rewriting
c. Dynamic Equivalence.
d. History of the text
1. Introduction
2. Proposition
– Savonarola’s Apologetic Schema and Analysis of Worldviews are the
Key to effective 21st Century Apologetics.
3. Girolamo Savonarola – His Context, Culture and Influences
a. The Renaissance In Florence
b. Savonarola – His Birth and Background
c. Savonarola – His Lifestory 1452-1498
4. The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
a. He is the Father of the fullest and clearest Apologetic purpose.
b. He is the Father of the most comprehensive method of presenting the Christian
apologetic as an integrated whole.
c. He is the Father of an approach that is so competent that it is as effective in
dealing with the issues of the 21st Century as it was those of his day of the 15th
Century.
d. He is the Father of the only approach that can provide an answer for the
weaknesses and blunders in present day Apologetics.
5. The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
a. His major work, The Triumph of the Cross, has been unavailable for over one
hundred years. It was known and its teaching valued by the Christian leaders of
the late 19th Century, but now it is unknown.
b. His integrated approach with the whole of Christianity as the Apologetic argument
has been forgotten and lost, by today‟s apologists.
c. Failure to heed his insights and adopt his approach led to a loss of nerve and
confusion in 20th Century Apologetics.
6. His Authority
7. His use of Scripture
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
7
8. His use of Philosophy
9. His use of Logic
10. His Apologetic Purpose
11. His Apologetic Premises
a. His epistemology compared to 21st Century theories
b. The complexity of religious language
c. Faith, Reason and Revelation
d. God‟s Sovereignty and Free will and Molinism.
e. Faith does not depend upon Apologetic proofs, nor is it created by such proofs
f. His gospel imperative and Fideism
g. To engage in the Apologetic Task has Apostolic authority and commission.
h. Reason alone will be the authority appealed to – not Church, Pope or Bible.
i. The argument to be in the language and thought forms of the hearers.
12. His Apologetic deals with the loss of nerve in current Apologetics
13. His Apologetic deals with the weaknesses and blunders in current
Apologetics
14. His Triumph of the Cross
a. The Motif of Petrarch
b. The work of Averroes
c. Parallel with Romans
d. His writing of the Triumph of the Cross
15. Savonarola’s Schema
16. Savonarola’s Propositions and Proof
17. Evaluation of his Apologetic
– Does he conform to the criteria he set himself?
a. He lived under the direction and Lordship of Christ
b. His argument and schema
c. His gentleness and respect.
d. Personal Bias
18. Evaluation of his Apologetic
– Is my proposition established?
a. Savonarola‟s Apologetic Schema and Analysis of Worldviews are the key to
effective 21st Century Apologetics.
b. Parallels between the 15th and 21st Centuries.
c. His Analysis of Worldviews in the context of 21st Century
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
8
d. His is not one among several apologetic tools - but the key to unifying them all.
19. It is important that his teaching should be recovered and promoted for the
benefit of the Christian community in the 21st Century.
20. Concluding remarks on the purpose of Apologetics
21. Works Cited and Bibliography
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
9
1 Introduction
The Illustration of the Elephant
Five blind men investigated an elephant. The first felt the trunk and said, ‘an
elephant is like a large hose.’ The second one touched the tail and stated, ‘an
elephant is like a rope.’ Still another encountered the ear and exclaimed, ‘an
elephant is like canvas.’ The fourth one examined a leg and said, ‘elephants are
like trees.’ Finally, the fifth one felt a side, and said emphatically, ‘elephants are
actually houses!’ Each thought clearly of the elephant in terms of his own too
limited data. 7
This old illustration points out the important truths: incomplete evidence or faulty
methodologies result in contradictions that are more apparent than real, and leave no
concept of the whole being that is the object of enquiry. Sadly, this has been exemplified
in much of the Apologetics of the 20th Century.
These are issues that Savonarola identified and effectively dealt with in The Triumph of
the Cross.
Unique approach – integrated and holistic
What makes his approach unique is that he presents all his evidence as inter-related and
not just cumulative. In doing this he reveals the holistic nature of the Christian
philosophy and divine revelation. This was not an accidental achievement but a carefully
thought through schema.8 He states this objective at the very outset and uses two
illustrations to assert his methodology.
Analogy of astronomical observation
The first illustration he uses is taken from astronomy. He infers that the sages of old
were able to make meaningful observation of the stars because they considered the
heavens as a whole and studied the relationship between each star and the whole mass
of the total stars that could be seen.
Philosophers have tried to understand something of God’s nature, not by looking
at one creature in isolation, but by looking at innumerable objects and the
harmony of the relationships between them. It is possible to do this because of
the mutual dependence of everything in the universe.9
To observe one star in isolation makes it impossible to say much that is meaningful
about its movement, brightness or size. But when considered in relationship to the rest
of the stars then it contributes to our understanding of the whole heavenly host. And it is
possible to say far more about the individual star, too. It is possible to compare and
contrast it with its neighbours and in so doing to say something meaningful about its
movement, brightness and size.
7 John Warwick Montgomery, editor, Evidence For Faith, Probe Books, Dallas 1991, Page 23
8 Schema - an underlying organisational pattern or structure; conceptual framework.
9 TOTC – page 83
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
10
Savonarola says that we need to take a similar holistic approach in Apologetics.
In the same way, we cannot fully understand the power, wisdom, and goodness
of Christ by contemplating one of His works in isolation. We must bring to mind
all the wonders that He has achieved. As we do, we shall be forced to
acknowledge His divinity, not based on one isolated point, but built on the
foundation of many reasons. Even if we are not convinced by one of His miracles
or teachings in isolation, we cannot (unless we are obstinate) fail to be persuaded
when we consider His works and teaching collectively. 10
The importance of his motif of the Triumph of the Cross as the foundation for
the schema
The second illustration of his schema is the central motif of the whole work. It is the
image of Christ seated in triumph in his chariot and all those affected by his works are
surrounding him. Some are glorified and share the benefit of his triumph; others are his
enemies and false philosophies, which are displayed as vanquished. The purpose of this
motif is to establish the wholeness and harmony of all the works of Christ and the
Apologetic evidence they provide.
Although it may be possible to grasp the mutual dependence of all the marvels of
nature, it is not so easy to grasp the relationship between all the works of Christ,
at once. I have therefore decided to present them using the image of a Triumphal
Chariot. This image should be comprehensible, even to the least intellectual.11
Many of those who have valued this work have failed to recognise the importance of the
motif, which Savonarola asks us to hold constantly in mind. Perhaps this may be due to
the fact that after establishing the motif, he only makes two direct references to it in the
rest of the book. But the way in which he very thoroughly establishes the motif should
alert us to its importance.
This Chariot, which we have described, symbolises a new world, from which shall
spring a new philosophy. The triumphal image of the Chariot recognises that the
First Cause (the Holy Trinity) is invisible and made known to us by what is
visible.12
2 Proposition – Savonarola’s Apologetic Schema and Analysis of
Worldviews are the key to effective 21st Century Apologetics.
I have several propositions that I wish to assert and hope to establish. Most of them are
supporting propositions for the one major assertion that forms the heart of this thesis.
My major proposition is that Savonarola is the forgotten Father of Apologetics and that
recovery of his Apologetic schema and analysis of Worldviews are the key to effective
21st Century Apologetics.
I propose to establish -
10 ibid
11 TOTC – page 83
12 TOTC – pages 83-84
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
11
a. that Savonarola is a key „Father‟ of Apologetics and that his Apologetic
teaching is original, profound and relevant.
b. that he is a „Forgotten‟ Father of Apologetics and that his relevance has been
„forgotten‟ in the English-speaking world of the 21st Century.
c. that his approach to Scripture, philosophy and logic are relevant and valid
today.
d. that he provides one of the clearest and most powerful definitions of the
Apologetic Purpose
e. that his Apologetic Premises are still valid and sometimes original.
f. that his argument is integrated and holistic – not based on isolated proofs.
g. that his Apologetic deals with the loss of nerve in current Apologetics.
h. that he has provided the clearest understanding of the Apologetic task, the
reasons for undertaking that task, the method of approaching that task and
the place of that task within the grace of God.
i. that his Apologetic deals with the weaknesses and blunders in current
Apologetics
j. that his Apologetic avoids proving an intelligent designer, unrelated to the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
k. that he avoids giving us a Christian apologetic in a way that avoids all
association with the world‟s criticism of the Church and Christians.
l. that his soteriology avoids the relativism of a pluralistic and blunted gospel.
m. that his Analysis of Worldviews is the key to effective 21st Century
Apologetics.
n. that his schema is not one among several apologetic tools - but the key to
unifying them all.
o. that it is most important that his teaching should be recovered and promoted
for the benefit of the Christian community in the 21st Century.
3 Girolamo Savonarola – his Context, Culture and Influences
The Renaissance In Florence
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it
was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of
incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the
spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had
nothing before us, we were all going direct to heaven, we were all going direct
the other way.
A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens, (1812 - 1870)
Charles Dickens was writing of another era, but his words vividly capture the atmosphere
in Savonarola‟s 15th Century Florence. Truly it was the best of times and the worst of
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
12
times. The contrasts were stark.
This was the age of Renaissance. A time of great self-confidence and pride in human
achievement. It was the beginning of Humanism, with man as the centre of the universe
and the measure of all things. This freedom of thought and rejection of religious
scholasticism began what would become the dominant thought form for the whole world
in the 21st Century. 13
There was an explosion of ideas and information. Gutenberg had printed his first Bible,
Caxton had printed Canterbury Tales, Erasmus, Da Vinci, Michelangelo and Thomas More
were contemporaries. In 1492 Columbus had discovered the New World. Spain
conquered Granada, ending the kingdom of the Islamic Moors. While in the east the
Islamic Turkish forces drove the Christians from Constantinople. Among them were
Greek scholars seeking refuge in the west. They were enthusiastically welcomed in
Florence where there was a ready appetite for their doctrines and teaching. There was a
great enthusiasm for collecting ancient artefacts and manuscripts as the Renaissance
principles were developed from the classical culture of ancient Greece and Rome.
Change was happening on a world scale, but the real hub of cultural and philosophical
development was concentrated in just a few streets and a couple of piazzas in the small
city of Florence. A compact Italian fortified city in the valley of the River Arno.
The Best Of Times
Politically Florence was powerful and had become the centre for trade and banking for
the whole of Europe. Kings, Princes, and Popes deposited their wealth there. At the end
of the 14th Century, Giovanni de Medici was the foremost banker and with the generous
use of his wealth he gained many friends. When his son Cosimo, succeeded him, he was
unopposed as he began to exercise supreme power; ruling as prince in the city. Under
the patronage of the Medici family the Arts, philosophy and political ideas were fostered
and flourished.
Educationally there was great growth in literacy and the city bore the air of a vast
school. Crowds would gather for lectures, academies and universities flourished, and the
introduction of printing enabled new libraries to be established. Many knew Latin and
Greek and were able to find pleasure in discussing the finer points of philosophy.
The availability of books and manuscripts and the interest in languages led to the
development of textual criticism. The scholar Lorenzo Valla demonstrated the falsity of
the Donation of Constantine. This forged document from the 8th Century was supposed
to be a contract of Emperor Constantine I, gifting temporal power in Italy to the Papacy.
Valla also showed that the Vulgate version of the Bible had significant mistranslations of
the Greek and Hebrew.
There was great pride in the fact that the distinguished writers Dante Alighieri and
Petrarch were from Florence and many made great efforts to continue their literary
13 Professor A. G. Dickens, who was director of the Institute of Historical Research of London University, wrote a compelling little study of „Martin Luther and the Reformation’, English Universities Press, London 1970. He said that a main purpose of his writing was to reveal something of the amazing diversity and depth of the changes sweeping Europe from Florence at the moment when the culture was beginning effectively to expand and reshape the destiny of the
whole human race.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
13
tradition – producing poems and philosophical books in Latin and Greek.
Cosimo de Medici (1389-1464), contributed to the building of the Monastery of St.
Mark and was able to endow it with a valuable library, which became the first public
library in Italy and drew many scholars to the city to make use of the facility.14
Architecturally there was a building boom of stately churches, magnificent palaces, and
elegant buildings. These were adorned with the sculptures and paintings of great artists
– such as Donatello, Ghiberti, Brunelleschi, Botticelli, Leonardo da Vinci and
Michelangelo. It was then, too, that the development of oil painting marked a new
period in the history of art. Previously the artistic forms had been stylised and fixed but
now there was a move to realism and the natural representation of nature. It was in
Florence that the whole theory of perspective was worked out. The themes were often
based on ancient Greek fables and histories. Because of the interest in man as opposed
to religious themes, there was a beginning of portrait painting where the representation
aimed for a true likeness.
The Worst Of Times
Savonarola records how he took a walk through the streets with the artist Michelangelo.
He commented that drugs and aphrodisiac concoctions were openly on sale. Gambling
and prostitution were patronised by the nobility. The Church was corrupt and
superstition replaced faith. He regarded Florence as another Sodom and Gomorrah and
of Lorenzo de Medici as an enemy of Christ.
Lorenzo de Medici (1449-1492) was the sole ruler of Florence when Savonarola arrived
in the city. He was known as „Lorenzo the Magnificent’ and the most brilliant of the
Medici family. A man of fine intellect and literary skill with excellent artistic taste. He was
patron of many artists, architects and scholars. Two who particularly benefited from his
support were the artist Michelangelo and Marsilio Ficino, the professor of the great
Platonic Academy, (which had been founded by Cosimo de Medici).
He enriched Florence with public works and buildings. His outward manners appeared
kind and refined. But he was a cruel tyrant who put to death eminent citizens for his own
political advantage. He robbed the poor and the charities set up to care for the poor. He
drove both young men and women into prostitution and he swindled the city‟s treasury.
But he was not the sole author of the evil in the city – there was sickness in the society
and in the Church.
There were extremes of poverty and wealth. Wealth was a major cause of the
corruption at the heart of the Church and state. In 1471 Sixtus IV was elected Pope after
buying the votes he needed and used his wealth to fund his immoral lifestyle. In
contrast, the poor were oppressed and loans at rates of 32.5% with compound interest
were standard practice under the Medicis. The grinding poverty led to famine and made
the city a breeding ground for the Black Death, plague.
Corrupt Church. The Church was corrupt in belief and behaviour. Savonarola described
14 Villari – Book 1 Ch 2.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
14
the situation with passion and heartbreak -
In these days, prelates and preachers are chained to the earth by the love of
earthly things. The care of souls is no longer their concern. They are content with
the receipt of revenue. The preachers preach to please princes and to be praised
by them. They have done worse. They have not only destroyed the Church of
God. They have built up a new Church after their own pattern. O Lord! Arise, and
come to deliver your Church from the hands of devils, from the hands of tyrants,
from the hands of iniquitous prelates.15
The Church was syncrestic, with fables and the writings of philosophers given equal
place with Scripture. Pagan gods and philosophers were worshipped and on one
occasion, the visit of the Pope was celebrated by erecting statues of heathen deities.
Plato was regarded as a prophet and astrology was used to determine God‟s will.
Corrupt Gospel. The Church had corrupted the gospel by its pluralism. It had denied
that Christ was the only hope of salvation and said that salvation could also be found in
the teachings of Plato and other religions. Those who chose to seek salvation in the
Christian faith were told that it depended on good works, earning merit and buying
indulgences. There was a loss of confidence in the Bible and so it was hardly used in
preaching or private devotions.
Violence. Life was cheap and rivals were simply killed by hired assassins. Children had
little sense of „right and wrong‟ and one favourite game was really a form of gang
warfare. This involved throwing stones and missiles at each other until one side was
unable to continue because of death or injury. State violence was directed at political
opponents and anyone considered a threat. This was the time of the Inquisition when the
most horrific forms of torture were developed and given approval by the Papacy. Some
of these techniques would be used on Savonarola.
Sexual Immorality. The city was known for the excesses of prostitution and the
sacrilege of sex with nuns. But particularly Florence was notorious for homosexual
promiscuity – a reputation similar to that of Corinth in New Testament times. Sodomy
was not restricted to one section of society, but was a regular part of social life. It was
not regarded as „deviant‟ behaviour but a common part of male experience, that had
widespread social ramifications. The sexual renown of Florentine males was so well
known even north of the Alps that in contemporary Germany „to sodomize‟ was popularly
dubbed florenzen and a „sodomite‟, a Florenzer. 16
Remarkably, for the first time in Florence - perhaps the first time in Christian
Europe - groups of men, mainly youths, are found defiantly challenging attempts
to repress sodomy. The armed gangs of lower-class youths ostentatiously showed
15 Quoted by Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church. VI, Page. 688
16 Michael Rocke, Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence, Oxford University Press. 1996. Page 3
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
15
off their boyfriends around the city. 17
Savonarola set up patrols to prevent gang rapes taking place in the streets and he said
that „good government is punishing the evil ones and getting sodomites and the wicked
out of your city’. After he was arrested and his morality rejected; a government official
responded – „Thank God, now we can sodomize!‟
Occult Practices. Astrology, divination and occult practises created an atmosphere of
fear and superstition. This not only affected personal life and practice but also became
formalised in the reaching of judgments in the courts, as part of the curriculum in the
Universities, and in the decision-making and administration of the Church. All nature
appeared to teem with hidden forces, and mysterious spirits.
Philosophy Undermined Faith. The philosophy of Florence presented man as the
centre of the universe.18 Visual expression was given to this belief in the commission and
erection of Michelangelo‟s statue of David. This depicts a very tall David immediately
before taking on the challenge of Goliath. He is naked because he represents all of
mankind and not just one man or one period of history. He is beautiful in his own right
and his dignity is increased by the confident way in which he can take on all challenges.
He has no weapons or armour because his resources are all within.
This teaching presented both a distorted estimation of man and a debasing of the person
and position of God. The Scriptures were viewed as interesting ancient documents to be
held alongside those of ancient Greece and Rome. Jesus was seen as a prophet and
teacher with Plato and Aristotle as his equals. The text of the Scriptures was viewed as
unreliable and its teaching on public and private morality was disregarded. Rather than
seeking to counter these ideas, the Church accepted and promoted them as the fount of
wisdom.
Fear of Islam. In the latter half of the 15th Century the Muslim community had been
driven out of Spain. Its members included many Arab scholars who had preserved the
science and philosophy of ancient Greece. Their teaching had been readily received in
Florence while their political influence was viewed with great suspicion. The Christian
West continued to hold ambitions of a great crusade, which would free the holy places of
Palestine from Muslim domination. But these had met with little success and instead of
reclaiming territory; the Turks had driven Christianity from its ancient capital of
Constantinople. Many of the Greek scholars from this city were welcomed as refugees in
Florence.
The fear involved both anxiety about the political intentions of Islam and an uncertainty
about the unique claims of Christianity in the face of the rapid spread of a rival faith.
Savonarola – His Birth and Background
17 ibid - Page 195
18 Thomas M. Lindsay, A History of the Reformation. Volume: 1, T & T Clark. Edinburgh. 1907. Page 158
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
16
Girolamo Savonarola was born on September 21st 1452. His grandfather Michele, was
physician to the court of the Duke of Ferrara and Girolamo, who was the third of seven
children, also planned to study medicine. Up to the start of his medical training, his basic
education centred on the works of St. Thomas Aquinas, the Arabic commentaries on
Aristotle, and the Bible. Michele was very fond of Girolamo and personally undertook his
education. By the age of ten he was able to write Latin fluently.19 But his grandfather
believed that the one subject that really mattered was the study of the Sacred
Scriptures. It is possible that by the age of twenty Girolamo had memorised most of the
Bible in Latin.20
Savonarola – His Lifestory 1452-1498
In his early twenties, his own spiritual renewal (possibly through a printed sermon of
Augustine) produced a growing sense of concern at the state of the Church. This drove
him to give up medicine and enter the Dominican Monastery in Bologna in 1475. His
devotion to God became the central focus of his life and he nearly always ended his
prayers with the words: ‘Lord, make known to me the path my soul should tread.’ 21 He
felt the answer to this question involved a commitment to the monastic life and his early
admiration for the teaching of St Thomas Aquinas drew him particularly to the Dominican
order.
Professor Jill Raitt, of the University of Chicago, specialised in the Middle Ages and
Reformation, and identifies the academic engagement of the Dominicans -
As the order became more involved in the universities, it inevitably became
involved in a more intellectual apostolate. One of the needs of the time was for a
serious attempt to cope theologically with the new, Aristotelian learning which
posed a serious threat to orthodoxy. Thomas Aquinas in particular helped to
disentangle the genuine teaching of Aristotle and to show how it could be made
to serve orthodox theology. Later on there was a similar problem with the new
humanism of the Italian Renaissance, and once again Dominicans were
prominently involved. 22
Called to Florence 1481. After six years he was sent to St. Mark‟s Monastery in
Florence. Here he taught theology; philosophical and moral science; and above all, the
study of the Scriptures with the help of Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Turkish languages.
These languages were also taught with the hope that one day the Lord would send him
and his brethren to preach the gospel to the Turks.23
It was in Florence that his preaching ministry began, when he was invited to give the
Lenten sermons in St Lorenzo. He based all his sermons on Bible texts at a time when
few Florentines read the Bible at all, since finding its Latin incorrect, they were afraid of
19 Paassen – page 3.
20 Paassen – page 13
21 Villari – Book 1 Ch. 1
22 Jill Raitt, contributor, Bernard McGinn and John Meyendorff, editors, Christian Spirituality: High Middle Ages and Reformation: Crossroad Publishing. New York. 1988
23 Villari – Book 1 Ch 10. Note that Savonarola often disclosed information about the studies at the monastery, in references made in his sermons.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
17
being corrupted by its teaching. Though his youthful hearers listened with great respect,
his style was so different to the eloquence of the other preachers in the city, that they
rejected him.
In contrast, the Augustinian monk, Fra Mariano da Genazzano, was preaching to crowds
in the city and the Medici held him in high esteem. His sermons were regarded as the
finest oratory and based in the philosophy of the Platonic Academy. He rarely referred to
Scripture but delighted in quoting Plato and Aristotle. To prevent any possibility of
tedium he told many stories and moved his hearers to frequent laughter with his many
jokes.
In 1484 Savonarola was sent by his community to the area of San Gimignano and then
on to Genoa. In these places he was again called on to preach and had time to develop
his homiletic skills. The same year (1484) Pope Sixtus IV died and many hoped that the
next Pope would bring reformation and renewal to the Church. But the result of the
election destroyed their hopes. It was obvious that the new Pope Innocent VIII had
gained power by using his wealth to bribe and cajole. As he began his Papal rule his
immorality and godlessness were of a worse degree than that of Sixtus IV. He openly
announced that his sons were to be regarded as princes. In 1487 he married his eldest
son to the daughter of Lorenzo de Medici, who in return had his thirteen-year-old son
Giovanni, made a cardinal. (He was later to be Pope Leo X). So Rome deepened its
reputation as a seat of scandal and sin.
Savonarola‟s reputation as a great preacher reached the city and in 1489 Lorenzo
requested the Community to have him returned to Florence. On his return he began by
expounding the book of Revelation and gradually the form of presentation changed into
passionate sermons. Because of growing numbers he was asked to move into the church
and preach from the pulpit, so that he could be heard more clearly. On Sunday 1st
August 1489, the church of St. Mark was filled with people who were in awe of his
intellectual brilliance and passion, but also said that his voice had supernatural power
and penetration. He was hailed a success and the whole city talked of him so that even
the members of the Platonic Academy wanted to discuss his message.24
He preaches in the Cathedral and resists the Medici 1491. Soon the church could
no longer hold the crowds and in Lent of 1491, Savonarola transferred to preach in
Santa Maria del Fiore, the Cathedral (Duomo) where the number of listeners increased.
His preaching became more passionate and included prophetic announcements about the
future of the city and strong criticism of the Medici government and the sin of the city.
This obviously roused the hostility of Lorenzo de Medici, and his friends. As Savonarola
became aware of the rising tension he thought for a time that he should confine his
preaching to personal faith, and not mention political issues or the need for Church
reform. But he found himself compelled to preach what was in his heart and his despair
over the corruption in the Church and in the city.
I sought no longer to speak in your name, O Lord; but you have overpowered
me, and conquered me. Your word has become like a fire within me, consuming
the very marrow of my bones. Therefore, am I derided and despised by the
24 His sermons were always published in Italian; but when he wrote them out for printing, he
found it easier to outline them in Latin. All the marginal notes in his Bibles are in Latin, and he always preferred that language when writing.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
18
people. But I have faith in the Lord; He gives me daily greater courage and
perseverance, and I preach the regeneration of the Church, taking the Scriptures
as my sole guide. Be of good cheer and return quickly, that I may tell you the
marvellous deeds of the Lord.’25
In these days there is no grace, no gift of the Holy Spirit that may not be bought
and sold. On the other hand, the poor are oppressed by grievous burdens, and
when they are called to pay sums beyond their means, the rich cry unto them,
‘Give me the rest’.26
Everyone knew that he was referring to Lorenzo and they were aware that their ruler
had corrupted the magistrates and raided both public and private funds. Because of
Savonarola‟s courage in voicing what everyone felt, he became their hero and in July
1491 he was elected Prior of St. Mark‟s. This position gave him greater responsibility and
prominence. It also gave him greater freedom, which he exercised in a manner that
heightened the tension with Lorenzo.
Lorenzo sent five of the leading citizens of Florence to insist that the Prior change his
behaviour and the content of his preaching, even hinting that he might be sent into
exile. Savonarola's response was a prophecy that great changes would occur and that
the Pope, the King of Naples, and Lorenzo were all close to death.27
This was now becoming a power struggle with the Prior gaining increasing influence. So
Lorenzo instructed Fra Mariano da Genazzano to preach a sermon denouncing the
prophecies and the person of Savonarola. Mariano took up this challenge with
enthusiasm. He was bitterly annoyed that the man from St Mark‟s had usurped his
supreme position as the leading preacher of Florence.
A great crowd was present along with Lorenzo and the leading citizens who were
expecting to witness a crushing diatribe against the Prior of St Mark's. Unfortunately,
Mariano became overexcited and made many accusations against Savonarola, which his
hearers instinctively knew were untrue. He made matters worse by making his claims
using vile and disgusting language so that his hearers were repelled. This meant that in
one sermon, his reputation of many years was destroyed.
Lorenzo felt very humiliated and Mariano was angry and vowed that he would have
vengeance on Savonarola and did finally succeed by becoming one of the principal
agents of his arrest and death.
Made Vicar General of Dominicans 1492. Within the year the prophecy concerning
Lorenzo‟s death and the death of the Pope was fulfilled. On 11 August 1492 a new Pope
was elected. A Spaniard, Rodrigo Borgia, who took the name Alexander VI. He too
gained power by bribery and corruption. While he was a cardinal he had fathered
several children by different mistresses. As Pope he continued in the same lifestyle.
At one point, when Alexander VI was absent from Rome (1501), he remarkably
25 Villari – Book 1 Ch 10.
26 ibid.
27 Villari – Book 1 Ch 8
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
19
left his daughter Lucretia in charge of the Holy See. 28
This same year Savonarola was appointed the Vicar General of the order of Dominicans
and for the next three years his influence grew steadily; until by mid 1495 he virtually
ruled the city from his pulpit.29
He predicts the coming of the French, during Lent 1494. Savonarola continued to
grieve over the godless state of the Church and its clergy. (It is worth quoting him to
sense the passion as well as the rhetoric.) He said,
They tickle men’s ears with talk of Aristotle and Plato, Virgil and Petrarch, and
take no concern in the salvation of souls. Why, instead of expounding so many
books, do they not expound the one Book in which is the law and spirit of life!
The Gospel, O Christians, you should ever have with you; not merely the letter,
but the spirit of the Gospel. They preach chastity, and maintain concubines; they
prescribe fasting, and feast splendidly themselves.
See, how in these days prelates and preachers are chained to the earth by love of
earthly things; the care of souls is no longer their concern; they are content with
the receipt of revenue; the preachers preach for the pleasure of princes, to be
praised and magnified by them . . . . And they have done even worse than this,
inasmuch as they have not only destroyed the Church of God, but built up
another after their own fashion. This is the new Church, no longer built of living
rock, namely, of Christians steadfast in the living faith and in the mould of love;
but built of sticks, namely, of Christians dry as tinder for the fires of hell. And
there is no prelate, nor great lord that has not intimate dealings with some
astrologer, who fixes the hour and the moment in which he is to ride out or
undertake some piece of business. For these great lords undertake no venture
without the guidance of their astrologer.
Our Church has many fine outer ceremonies for the solemnization of ecclesiastical
rites, grand vestments and numerous draperies, with gold and silver candlesticks,
and so many chalices that it is a majestic sight to behold. Men feed upon these
vanities and rejoice in these pomps, and say that the Church of Christ was never
so flourishing, nor divine worship so well conducted as at present . . . . also, that
the first prelates were inferior to these of our own times . . . . But do you know
what I would tell you? In the primitive Church the chalices were of wood, the
prelates of gold; in these days the Church has chalices of gold and prelates of
wood. 30
These have introduced devilish games among us; they have no belief in God, and
jeer at the mysteries of our faith! What are you doing, O Lord? Why do you
slumber? Arise, and come to deliver your Church from the hands of the devils,
from the hands of tyrants, the hands of iniquitous prelates. Have you forsaken
your Church? Do you not love her? Is she not dear to you? O Lord God, You have
28 F. Donald Logan, A History of the Church in the Middle Ages, Routledge Press. London. 2002. Page 352.
29 The New Catholic Encyclopaedia, Catholic University of America, Washington DC, 1967
30 Quoted by Philip Schaff in History of the Christian Church. VI, p. 688
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
20
dealt with us as a wrathful father, You have cast us out from your presence!
Hasten then the chastisement and the scourge, that it may be quickly granted to
us to return to you.
Be not scandalized, O my brethren, by these words; rather, when you see that
the righteous desire chastisement, know that it is because they seek to banish
evil, so that the kingdom of our Blessed Lord, Jesus Christ, may flourish in the
world. The only hope that now remains to us is that the sword of God may soon
smite the earth.’31
His answer to the sins of the city, state and church leadership, was a removal of the
corrupt leaders and a chastisement from God, which would bring pain and suffering;
causing all to be driven to repentance. Prophetically, in Lent 1494, he pronounced that
the servant God would use, like a latter day Cyrus, would be the French king Charles
VIII, and his multinational army which was moving through Europe and challenging the
lands controlled by the Pope and deposing the local princes in their city states.
His preaching shared the same apocalyptic themes of coming crisis, judgment and the
need to repent, as seen in previous generations. But as Bernard McGinn32 points out –
Perhaps the most distinctive characteristic of the pessimistic role of late medieval
apocalyptic thought was its obsession with the state of the Church. Corruption in
head and members of Christ's Mystical Body was the most evident sign that evil
was mounting to a point of culmination.33
Arrival of Charles VIII and rout of the Medici 1494. Piero de Medici had succeeded
Lorenzo and had ruled for two years when the threat from the French reached a crisis
point. The French had sent envoys and discovered that though the princes of the city
states were opposed to Charles VIII, the people viewed his coming very favourably. In
Florence, Savonarola, gave an invitation from the pulpit, to the new Cyrus to come and
take over the city. In November 1494, the people were stunned to find that Piero de
Medici had fled and placed the city at the mercy of Charles VIII.
This meant that the people could now take control of their own city, but they did not
know whom to trust and had no leader. Fortunately they instinctively gathered at the
Duomo where Savonarola was due to preach. The crowd was so closely packed that
there was no room to move. All looked to the only man with any influence and integrity.
Carefully Savonarola bent forward in the pulpit and avoided all reference to politics and
proclaimed the law of peace, charity and union. He also went on to say that his
prophecies were being fulfilled and that this was the Lord‟s doing. Their response needed
31Sermon xxiii. pp. 578-579, Prediche sul Salmo Quam bonus: Prato, Guasti, 1846. p. 237. These sermons were reported verbatim. After their delivery in the Duomo, Savonarola wrote them
out in Latin in a somewhat abbreviated form, as may be ascertained from the holograph codex at St. Mark‟s. They were afterwards translated and published in an amended form by Girolamo Giannotti during the sixteenth century. Quoted by Villari – Book 1 Ch 10.
32 Emeritus Professor of Theology, Chicago University and world authority of medieval mysticism.
33 Bernard McGinn, Apocalyptic Spirituality: Treatises and Letters of Lactantius, Adso of Montier-En-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan Spirituals, Savonarola, Paulist Press. New
York.1979. Page 184.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
21
to be repentance and unity.
My people, what desire has ever been mine but to see you saved, to see you
united?’ ‘Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!’ But I have said this so
many times, I have cried to you so many times; I have wept for you, O Florence,
so many times, that it should be enough. To You I turn, O Lord, to You, who did
die for love of us and for our sins: forgive, O Lord, forgive the Florentine people,
that we might be Your people.34
Knowing that the King was coming, the city sent out envoys to try to settle terms with
him. But they were not well received. Then Savonarola made a visit out to the French
camp and requested to see him. Having been welcomed into the King‟s presence he
spoke directly.
O most Christian king, you are an instrument in the hand of the Lord, who sends
you to relieve the woes of Italy, as for many years I have foretold; and He sends
you to reform the Church, which now lies prostrate in the dust. But if you are not
just and merciful; if you should fail to respect the city of Florence, its women, its
citizens, and its liberty; if you should forget the task the Lord has sent you to
perform, then He will choose another to fulfil it; His hand shall smite you, and
chastise you with terrible scourges. These things I say to you in the name of the
Lord.35
The King held the Prior in high esteem, as the one who had identified him as the servant
of God and predicted his victories. It was for this reason that Charles VIII treated the
city of Florence with more deference when he did arrive.
Savonarola returned with the news that the King was coming and that he was to be
received with honour and that in return he would treat the people honourably. On
hearing this, the people began great preparations at the Medici palace36 for the reception
of the King.
On 17 November, the king made his state entry through the streets which were covered
with awnings and draped with hangings and tapestries. The description of the King‟s
triumphal entry hinted at the motif which Savonarola would use in his Triumph of the
Cross. All eyes were on the King, surrounded by the powerful multi-national army. He
wore black velvet with a mantle of gold brocade and rode on a beautiful horse; entering
the city with his lance held out as a sign of victory. At his side were two Cardinals,
followed by the royal body-guard of 100 French bowmen, and then 200 French knights
marching on foot. Behind them were the Swiss infantry, the French cavalry and the
Scottish archers. It was estimated that this mercenary army numbered about 12,000.
The procession crossed the Ponte Vecchio (Old Bridge) and made its way to the
Cathedral via the Piazza. The King entered the Duomo and was greeted by leaders of
the city. After some prayers they escorted him to the Medici Palace. That night and the
following day were filled with feasting and music – even before any terms for a treaty
34 Villari – Book 2 Ch 2.
35 Villari – Book 2 Ch 2
36 Now known as the Riccardi Palace in Via Cavour
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
22
had been negotiated.
In the rush of events Savonarola was recognised by all as a true prophet because of all
that had occurred. He had the attention of the King and the confidence of the city so it
was natural that he should be the one looked to for counsel and direction regarding the
future.
The Republic established 1495, The terms agreed with the King gave freedom to the
citizens of Florence in return for their loyalty to the French regime and payment of taxes.
But the people did not know how to handle this freedom, so they looked to Savonarola
for guidance. He was reluctant to get involved in politics but as he continued to preach
the gospel, he also began to proclaim that the Lord would renew all things and then use
Florence as the instrument of renewal in all Italy.
O people of Florence, you shall begin the reformation of all Italy, and spread your
wings over the earth to bear reform to all nations. Remember that the Lord has
given plain signs that it is His purpose to renew all things, and that you are the
people chosen to begin this great enterprise, provided that you follow the
commands of Him who calls and invites you to return to the spiritual life.37
On 12th December 1494 he decided to address the political issues. He explained that the
best government was, to be ruled by a single good monarch. But it was also the worst
form of government if the single ruler were a bad monarch. The other options were
aristocracy or democracy and he suggested that democracy would suit the nature of the
Florentines, if they acknowledged Christ as the supreme ruler.38 The Scriptures were to
be its book of laws, and love for God and neighbour would make them strong. He
proposed a Greater Council of 3,200 citizens, which would be divided into three sections
with each ruling for six months. This was found to be too complex and so the number
was reduced to eighty men over the age of forty.
Savonarola did not enter into politics of his own choice, but only when impelled by the
irresistible force of events. He was not a member of the Council but he ruled and
exercised influence through his preaching in the Duomo. Within one year the freedom of
Florence was established and a Republic formed, taxation was reformed, justice
re-organized, and the Greater Council was instituted. All this had been accomplished,
without a sword being drawn or any blood shed.
This Friar made no harangues in the streets, had no seat in the Councils of the
State, yet he was the soul of the whole people, and the chief author of every law
of the new government. In all the laws subsequent to the revolution of 1494, the
influence of the democratic monk is clearly to be traced in every word and
detail.39
37 Villari – Book 2 Ch 4.
38 In the course of his last sermon on Haggai he announced that it was the Lord‟s will to give a new head to the city of Florence; and after keeping his audience long in suspense, finally declared
„This new head is Jesus Christ; He seeks to become your King!’ Villari – Book 2 Ch 5
39 Villari – Book 2 Ch 5.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
23
There was a new spirit in the city. High fashion was exchanged for modest dress.
Gambling, drugs and sexual excesses were curtailed and the main occupation of leisure
time was reading the Scriptures or the printed sermons of the Prior. Prayer became a
central feature of life and people flocked to the churches. The poor were cared for and
trade was conducted with honesty. People from outside of the city travelled in to hear
the Prior preach in the Duomo. At times even this vast Cathedral could not hold all who
wanted to listen. But the most significant thing was that they did not just hear the Word
– they responded and hundreds were converted.
He is summoned to Rome and resists the Medici 1495 – 1496. Piero de Medici had
fled to Rome where he persuaded Pope Alexander to help him to re-establish his rule.
The Pope readily agreed to support him because he wanted to punish the city for its
loyalty to France. But his real aim was the total destruction of the Republic and the
temporary reinstatement of the Medici, as a means to making his own son the ruler.
In Florence the Franciscan Community was filled with jealousy and hated the popularity
of the Prior. They accused him of meddling in politics, which they said was not proper for
a man of God. Savonarola silenced them by citing the example of Moses and the
prophets of the Old Testament. Their hatred continued and became one of the principal
causes of Savonarola's eventual death.
He had other enemies who were offended by his preaching and power. The most bitter
and vocal were the upper class youth who gained the name of the Arrabiati (the Furies).
They were joined by the old friends of the Medici, who were called the Compagnacci.
Knowing that there was growing ill feeling against him in Rome, Savonarola had kept the
tone of his criticism quieter. But those who were against him began to circulate letters
early in 1495, which accused the Prior of hatred of the Medici and the Pope. Pope
Alexander‟s anger was stirred and further inflamed by accusations brought to him by
Savonarola‟s worst enemy, Mariano da Genazzano, who always spoke of the Prior as „The
Devil’s Instrument.‟
The Pope‟s response was to send a Brief (official letter) to Savonarola on 25th July 1495.
It was couched in mild terms, but its invitation to visit Rome was seen by many as a trap
to have the Prior killed once he left the safety of Florence. He wrote –
To our well-beloved son, greeting and the apostolic benediction. We have heard
that of all the workers in the Lord’s vineyard, you are the most zealous; at which
we deeply rejoice, and give thanks to the Almighty God. We have likewise heard
that you assert that your predictions of the future proceed not from you but from
God; wherefore we desire, as behoves our pastoral office, to have conversation
with you concerning these things; so that being better informed by you, of God’s
will, we may be better able to fulfil it. Wherefore, by your vow of holy obedience,
we instruct you to attend on us here without delay, and we shall welcome you
with loving-kindness.40
All knew the evil nature of the Pope and were aware of the plots of the Arrabiati, who
had already tried to kill Savonarola, so no one was deceived by the letter. If the Pope did
not kill him on his way then he would probably hold the Prior as a prisoner. So
40 Villari – Book 3 Ch 2.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
24
Savonarola‟s friends warned him that there was danger for him if he went and also
danger for the city if he were absent.
It was a dilemma requiring Savonarola to either disobey the Pope‟s mandate, or risk his
life at the hands of the Pope or the Arrabiati. Savonarola quickly replied on 31 July and I
quote part of his response.
Most Blessed Father! The Holy Father chooses to summon to him, his humble
servant. But I am barely recovered from a very serious malady, which has forced
me to suspend both preaching and study, and still threatens my life. There are
many adversaries, both within and outside the city, who, having sought to
enslave it, and having been confounded instead, now seek my blood, and have
frequently attempted to take my life by steel and poison.41 Wherefore I could not
depart without manifest risk, nor can I even walk through the city without an
armed escort. And should your Holiness desire greater certainty on the matters
publicly foretold by me concerning the chastisement of Italy and the renovation of
the Church, you will find them set forth in a book of mine that is now being made
public.42 Accordingly, I beseech your Holiness to graciously accept my very true
and plain excuses, and to believe that it is my ardent desire to come to Rome, as
soon as possible.43
The Pope replied informally saying that his excuse was accepted. But on 8th September,
he sent an official Brief addressed to the Franciscan Community in Florence, which stated
that Savonarola was a „disseminator of false doctrines’. The Pope went on to say that he
had shown great patience towards him, in the hope that he would repent. Now he
ordered that the Prior should „refrain from every description of preaching, whether public
or private’. All this was under pain of excommunication.44
Savonarola was now in a difficult position because he did not want to rebel against the
Pope. But neither did he want the Republic to be crushed by the growing conspiracies
and the removal of his own leadership. He put his feelings into a letter sent to a brother
Dominican in Rome on 15th September.
It is known to the entire world that the charges made against me are false, and
will bring great infamy on those prelates and the whole of Rome. I well know that
my accusers have no just cause for attack, for truly they are stoning me for a
41 On 24th May 1495, an attempt was made on his life in the Cocomero street after he had been
preaching.
42 He here alludes to his „Compendium Revelationum.‟
43 Villari – Book 3 Ch 2.
44 Excommunication is the most severe punishment the Roman Catholic Church can exercise. It is the privation of all rights resulting from the social status of the Christian as such. The excommunicated person, it is true, does not cease to be a Christian, since his baptism can never
be effaced; he can, however, be considered as an exile from Christian society and as non-existent, for a time at least, in the sight of ecclesiastical authority. But such exile can have an end (and the Church desires it), as soon as the offender has given suitable satisfaction. Meanwhile, his status before the Church is that of a stranger. He may not participate in public worship nor receive the Body of Christ or any of the sacraments. Moreover, if he be a cleric, he is forbidden to administer a sacred rite or to exercise an act of spiritual authority. New Advent Catholic Encyclopaedia.
This is the modern definition of excommunication, but for many in the 15th Century it was thought to include the loss of eternal salvation.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
25
good deed; but I dread them not, neither am I afraid of their power, for the grace
of God and a pure conscience are enough for me. I know the root of all these
plots, and know them to be the work of evil-minded citizens who would wish to
re-establish tyranny in Florence, and are in conspiracy with certain Italian
potentates. All these men seek my death; so I can no longer go abroad without a
guard of armed men. Nevertheless, if there is no other way of saving my
conscience, I am resolved to make submission, so as to avoid even a venial sin.
For the present I suspend judgment and take no hasty decision, following the
example of the Fathers.45
He also wrote to the Pope saying, ‘And now again I repeat that which I have always said;
that I submit myself and all my writings to the correction of the Holy Roman Church.’
This elicited another Papal Brief on 16th of October that addressed him as if he had
come to repentance.
In other letters we have manifested our grief to you, regarding these
disturbances in Florence, of which your sermons have been the chief cause;
forasmuch as instead of preaching against vice and in favour of union, you did
predict the future, the very thing that might give birth to discord even among a
peaceful people, but much more among the Florentines, in whom there be so
many seeds of discontent and party spirit. These were the reasons for which we
summoned you to our presence; but now that, by your letters and the testimony
of many cardinals, we find you prepared to yield obedience to the Roman Church,
we do greatly rejoice, feeling assured that you have erred rather from too much
simplicity than from badness of heart. Wherefore we again reply to your letters,
and in virtue of your vow of holy obedience command you to abstain from all
sermons not only in public, but in private, so that no man may say that after
preaching in the pulpit you have been reduced to conventicles46. And you will
continue in this course until such time as you are able to seek our presence with
greater safety and with honour—when we will receive you in a joyful and fatherly
spirit. 47
Because this Brief was a long time in delivery, Savonarola was able to preach three
times in October, before the instruction to be silent arrived.
The Pope could find no fault with the Prior‟s teaching and a cardinal‟s hat was offered to
Savonarola on condition that he would change the tone of his sermons. This offer was
most unexpected and came at a time of heightened tension, The Prior‟s response was
great anger because he now had proof that Rome traded in holy things and regarded
vocations in the Church as items to be sold. „Come to my next sermon, and you shall
45 This letter was published by Mons. Perrens, to whom it had been given by Abate Bernardi, who
had discovered it in a codex of the Marcian Library of Venice (class ix. 4t), with the date 15th of September, 1496. But this date was changed by Mons. Perrens to that of 15th of September, 1495, and Gherardi has proved that he was right in so doing: It is true that in the old Codex 2053 of the Riccardi Library (sheet cxvi°) the letter is dated 1496; but there is an added note to the effect that the letter should be placed directly after the Brief of the 8th of September, 1495, and that its original date of 1495 had been afterwards erroneously altered to 1496.
46 Illegal religious meetings
47 Villari – Book 3 Ch 2.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
26
hear my reply to Rome‟ was his reply to the messenger.
On 17th February, 1496, Savonarola reappeared in the pulpit to begin a Lenten series of
sermons. He was overflowing with grief and indignation. He knew that the battle with the
Pope was becoming more intense and that his life was now in serious danger. After
months of silence, the people wanted to hear his voice and to hear what he would say
about Rome. Standing room in the Duomo was insufficient and so an amphitheatre of
seventeen rows of seats was erected against the wall of the nave.
Savonarola began by explaining that he had written to Rome, and that he had affirmed
his faith in Catholic Doctrine and that he was willing to retract anything that he may
have preached or written that was found to be heretical. He went on to say that he
would always be prepared to yield obedience to the Roman Church and that to refuse to
obey would be to put one‟s salvation in jeopardy.
Then having declared the orthodoxy of his belief and his willingness to obey he went on
to qualify the terms of his obedience. He said that we are not bound to obey our
superiors or even the Pope if their command is contrary to the Gospel. To illustrate this
he accused the people of obeying unchristian instructions.
He tells you to fast on a certain Saturday, at a certain hour, and you fast, and
believe you are saved. I tell you that the Lord wills not that you fast on such a
day or at such an hour, but wills that you avoid sin throughout all the days of
your life. Instead, you are good for one hour of the day, in order to be bad all
your life. Observe the ways of these men during the last three days of Holy Week.
See how they go about seeking indulgences and pardons! Come here, go there,
kiss St. Peter, St. Paul, this Saint and that! Come, come, ring bells, dress altars,
deck the churches, come all of you, for three days before Easter, and then no
more. God mocks your doings and does not heed your ceremonies, . . . for,
Easter passed, you will be worse than before. All is vanity, all is hypocrisy in our
times; true religion is dead.48
Then with great courage he turned to a forensic analysis and condemnation of Rome and
Papal leadership. He acknowledged the authority of the Pope, quoting the New
Testament: ‘You are Peter, and on this rock will I build my church; and that which you
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.’ But then repeated that we are not bound to
obey everything and at times even the Pope needs to be resisted as a duty - as St. Paul
resisted St. Peter and corrected him. Then people would have to say – ‘You do err, you
are not the Roman Church, you are a man and a sinner.’
Then he continued
You, Rome, are stricken with a mortal malady. You have lost your health, and
have forsaken the Lord; you are sick with sins and tribulations . . . . If you would
be healed, forsake feasting; forsake your pride, your ambition, your lusts, and
your greed: these are the food that have caused your sickness, these that bring
you to death.
Thus says the Lord: Inasmuch as Italy is all full of iniquities, harlots, and
miserable people who exploit the sexual weakness of others, I will overwhelm her
with the scum of the earth; will abase her princes, and trample the pride of
48 Villari – Book 3 Ch 3.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
27
Rome. These invaders shall capture her sanctuaries, and defile her churches; and
inasmuch as these have been made dens of vice, I will make them stables for
horses and swine, which will be less displeasing to God than seeing them made
haunts of prostitutes.
That is, fly from Rome, for Babylon signifies confusion, and Rome has confused all
the Scriptures, confused all vices together, confused everything. Fly, then, from
Rome, and come to repentance.49
He spoke so boldly because he was convinced that Pope Alexander‟s election was null,
and he hoped that a Council would soon be formed to call the Church leadership to
account and put an end to its sin.
The sermon ended with a prophecy concerning his own end. He described the situation
as a war with Rome and that it would end in victory. But for him personally it would end
in death -
I tell you it will end in death and being cut to pieces. Rest assured, however, that
all this will serve to spread abroad this doctrine, which proceeds not from me, but
from God. I am but a tool in His hands; wherefore I am resolved to fight to the
death. I would be glorified only in You, my God! Neither mitres nor Cardinals’
hats would I have, but only the gift You have conferred on your saints—death, a
crimson hat, a hat reddened with blood; that is my desire.50
The impact of this sermon was felt in most of Europe and even in the Islamic world
where the Sultan had his sermons translated into Turkish, so that he could read them.51
During the summer the city suffered from sickness and famine, being isolated from the
commerce and support of other Italian states because of the ongoing dispute between
Rome and the Prior and Republic. The Arrabiati relished the general distress and said
that it proved that the Prior was a deceiver and the city should surrender to Rome. The
Council was uncertain what course to adopt, and appealed to Savonarola to preach and
guide them again.
Savonarola responded to the request, and re-entered the pulpit on the 28th of October.
But now the atmosphere was quite different. People were distressed and feared for the
future. They expected famine and war which would be followed by exile and death. All
believed the republic was nearing its end and that the Arrabiati would take power. The
words of the Prior gave them courage and hope.
One week later on All Souls‟ Day, he preached on ‘The art of dying a good death.’52 He
said that the true Christian ought to keep the idea of death always before his eyes.
Death is the most solemn moment of our life: it is then that the evil one makes
his last attack upon us. It is as though he were always playing chess with man,
and waiting the approach of death to give him checkmate. He who wins at that
49 Villari – Book 3 Ch 3.
50 Villari – Book 3 Ch 3.
51 ibid.
52 Villari – Book 3 Ch 5.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
28
moment wins the battle of life. O my brethren, for what do we live in this world,
except to learn to die a good death!
Then he announced that he had been declared heretical in his teaching but that he would
now refute his critics by publishing his teaching in his book that was nearing completion
and which was titled - The Triumph of the Cross.
Tension increases and the Bonfire of the Vanities 1497. Savonarola spent the
beginning of 1497 in silent isolation. His focus was on the writing and editing of the
„Triumph of the Cross‟, but also he gave time to writing other pamphlets. Through the
wide distribution of his writings he hoped to gather more supporters in the violent
struggle with Rome, which he believed was coming to a climax.
Savonarola‟s place as preacher was taken by Frà Domenico, who was having to contend
with the ever more confident Arrabiati. As the time of Carnival approached they wanted
to revive the former orgies and festivities, especially the game of stones where youths
and children assaulted each other in the piazzas. These had all been banned by
Savonarola and now Domenico preached against them and had a new law passed in the
Council to prohibit some of the festivities.
The previous year Savonarola had involved the children in processions and prayers. But
this year they went about in small groups visiting the homes of the wealthy and asked
them to surrender any lewd literature, gambling equipment, or obscene artworks. Also
the carnival masks and costumes worn at the orgies. When anything was handed over
they offered a special prayer of blessing written by the Prior.
The last day of the Carnival was 7th February and in the morning, adults and children
attended Mass. They then returned to their homes for a meal before reassembling for a
great procession in the city. The destination was the Piazza, where a huge pyramid had
been formed from the collected „vanities‟. Its size alone was impressive and may well
have been 18 metres high. Packed in among the items were combustible materials. At a
given signal, four guardians of the pile set fire to the pyramid, which immediately burst
into flames. Trumpeters played fanfares and bells were rung while the people shouted
for joy at the climax of the carnival.
In spring 1497, Savonarola decided to preach again from the pulpit. There was
considerable excitement at the announcement that this would happen. Both friends and
foes were equally thrilled by the prospect. The Arrabiati threatened that he would not be
allowed to preach. His supporters said that he would be heard. The agitation reached
such a pitch that bets were placed on whether the sermon would be preached. When the
Council heard this they issued a decree, annulling the wagers and forbidding any attempt
to prevent the sermon from being given. 53
But those who opposed the Prior were not deterred from seeking to kill him. Some of
Savonarola‟s friends visited him in his monastic cell and begged him not to preach,
because his life was at risk. But he replied: „No fear of man shall induce me to deprive
the people of their sermon on the day appointed by the Lord to His disciples for going to
spread His doctrine through the world.’
53 Villari – Book 4 Ch 2.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
29
On the day the Prior entered the pulpit. He began by speaking of faith as all-powerful.
And went on -
The times predicted are now at hand; the hour of danger has come; and now it
shall be manifest who is truly with the Lord. The wicked thought to prevent this
sermon today; but they should know that I have never shirked my duty through
fear of man. No mortal upon earth, be he great or small, can boast of having
hindered me from fulfilling my office. I am even ready to lay down my life for it.
O Lord! deliver me from these foes who brand me as a seducer; deliver my soul,
since for my body I fear not.54
Immediately a great crash sounded through the Cathedral, caused by one of his
opponents who had taken the alms box and thrown it down onto the stone flooring. This
was the signal for the disturbance to begin. The doors opened and many people fled out
into the street. Those people still in the building shouted and banged on benches and
doors. Some of the more courageous gathered round the pulpit to protect the Prior.
Others went to fetch arms from nearby houses and returned with lances and swords.
Throughout Savonarola endeavoured to be heard and seeing that it was a futile task, he
knelt in prayer until his friends could secure safe passage for him. Then surrounded by
them, displaying their arms, they made their way to St Mark‟s Monastery. On arrival in
the monastery garden, and among his supporters he concluded his sermon –
The longer the Lord stays His hand, the more heavily and severely will He smite
each one according to his works. The wicked refuse to believe, refuse to listen;
but they will fall into the pit they have dug for others. They are undermining the
foundations of a wall that will crush them as it breaks. Now I will sing praises
unto the Lord and joyfully depart from this life.55
The events of the day were hot news and the full details were soon known throughout
Italy.
Excommunication 1497. The people had originally gathered for a word from the Prior
to sustain them in their suffering from the plague. All they had heard was, „Do not fear,
cast not away your trust in God; it is His proving time; arouse yourselves, and help your
sick brethren.’ But the people died, and poverty followed without any sign of a miracle so
that many began to waver in their faith, and lose confidence in Savonarola.
When the Pope heard of the riot he realised that the support for Savonarola was
weakened and that the Arrabiati were growing in strength. So he was more open to their
request that it was now the right time to excommunicate the Prior.
Realising what was being planned, Savonarola wrote to the Pope, on 22nd of May. He
asked why the Pope was angry with his servant and pointed out that the Pope was ready
to listen to the false accusations made against him but always refused to listen to the
Prior himself. He ended by asserting that his sermons and writings proved his orthodoxy,
54 Villari – Book 4 Ch 2.
55 Villari – Book 4 Ch 2
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
30
and this would be seen by means of his Triumph of the Cross. His final words were -
For if all human aid fail me, I will put my trust in God, and show the world the
iniquity of those, who, may perhaps be driven to repent the work they have in
hand.56
His letter was useless because eight days earlier, 13th May, the Brief of
excommunication had been despatched.
Therefore we now command you, on all festivals, and in the presence of the
people, to declare the said Frà Girolamo excommunicate, and to be held as such
by all men, for his failure to obey our apostolic admonitions and commands. And,
under pain of the same penalty, all are forbidden to assist him, hold conversation
with him, or approve him either by word or deed, inasmuch as he is an
excommunicated person, and suspected of heresy.—Given in Rome this 13th day
of May, 1497.57
Savonarola responded with dignity and formed his defence. The day after the
proclamation he wrote an „Epistle against surreptitious excommunication,
addressed to all Christians beloved of God.‟ In it he repeated the orthodoxy of his
teaching and concluded:
The lukewarm need have no fear, for this excommunication is invalid both in the
sight of God and man, inasmuch as it is based on the false reasons and
accusations devised by our enemies. I have always submitted and even still
submit to the authority of the Church, nor will I ever fail in my obedience; but no
one is bound to yield to commands opposed to love and the law of God, since in
such case our superiors are no longer the representatives of the Lord.58
The leading citizens who supported Savonarola, wrote to the Pope on 8th July -
Most Holy Father, we are deeply afflicted to have incurred the ban of the Church,
not only because of the respect always entertained by our Republic for the Holy
Keys, but because we see that a most innocent man has been wrongfully and
maliciously accused to your Holiness. We deem this Prior to be a good and pious
man, and thoroughly versed in the Christian faith. He has laboured many years
for the welfare of our people, and no fault has ever been detected either in his life
or his doctrine. Wherefore we fervently implore your Holiness, in your paternal
and divine charity, to use your own judgment in this matter, and remove the
weight of your ban not only from Father Girolamo Savonarola, but from all those
who may have incurred it. Your Holiness could do no greater kindness to the
Republic, especially in this time of pestilence, in which bans are of grave peril to
56 Villari – Book 4 Ch 2
57 Villari – Book 4 Ch 2.
58 ibid.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
31
men’s souls.59
This was one of many letters sent through the remainder of the year, from the Republic
in Savonarola‟s defence.
1498 His last year – January and February. At the start of 1498 Savonarola was
engaged in writing and lecturing at St Mark‟s monastery. He was still excommunicated
by the authority of the Pope, but this seemed to fire him with new zeal and he almost
gloried in the notoriety it provided. In one piece he wrote (I have emphasised some of
the wording to draw attention to his attitude of mind) –
It is feared by some that, although this excommunication be powerless in
Heaven, it may have power in the Church. For me it is enough not to be
interdicted by Christ. O my Lord, if I should seek to be absolved from this
excommunication, let me be sent to hell. O Lord, you have thrown me into a
flood from which I have neither the power nor the will to escape. But I beseech
You to let no word pass my lips that may be opposed to the Holy Scriptures or to
the Church.60
Before Lent the Prior gave a powerful lecture in St. Mark‟s in which he denounced the
vices of the clergy. His passion for spiritual renewal is seen in these excerpts –
When I reflect on the life led by priests I am constrained to weep. O my brethren
and my children, shed tears for these woes of the Church, so that the Lord may
call the priests to repentance, for it is plain that terrible chastisement awaits
them. The tonsure is the seat of all iniquity. It begins in Rome, where the clergy
make mock of Christ and the saints. Not only do they refuse to suffer for the
Lord’s sake, but even traffic with the sacraments. Woe, woe to Italy and to Rome!
Come, come, O priests! Come, my brethren; let us do our best to revive a little of
our love of God! O Father, we shall be thrown into prison, we shall be persecuted
and done to death. So let it be! They may kill me as they please, but they will
never tear Christ from my heart. I am ready to die for my God.61
With the protection of his supporters and recognising that his excommunication was
invalid, Savonarola began to preach. In a sermon toward the end of the Carnival season
on 18th February, he spoke of the Pope and the papal authority -
I take it for granted there is no man who is not liable to error. You are mad to say
that a Pope cannot err, when there have been so many wicked Popes who have
erred! ... If it were true that no Pope could ever err, ought we then to do even as
they do in order to gain salvation? Go! read how many decrees have been made
by one Pope and revoked by the next; and how many opinions held by some
59 Villari – Book 4 Ch 2.
60 Villari – Book 4 Ch 5
61 Villari – Book 4 Ch 5.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
32
Popes are contradicted by those of other Pontiffs.62
He further illustrated this from all the contradictions in the Briefs launched against
himself.
On 26th February the Pope threatened the Council of Florence, saying that they had
allowed freedom to Savonarola to inflict a gross insult to the Holy See, and that unless
measures were taken to silence the Prior immediately, he would excommunicate the
whole city. This would have meant that all the churches would have been closed and all
sacraments prohibited.
Savonarola saw that the situation needed a proactive approach. So, instead of waiting
for each new ruling from Rome, he began plans for a new council called together to
depose Pope Alexander VI .
1498 His last year – March. The Pope threatened excommunication for the whole city
if the Council did not restrain Savonarola, and so on 17th March the Council met and
decided that Savonarola should be silenced. The next day, the third Sunday in Lent, he
gave his last sermon and said farewell to his people.
The Prior now resolved to make a final effort to form a council, both to defend his cause
and to see that the evil Pope was deposed. He had the documentary evidence to support
both objectives and hoped the necessity of reforming the Church would be proved, and
the work begun. He knew that King Charles VIII, was in favour of calling a council and
that when the King had been in Rome, eighteen Cardinals had encouraged him to depose
the Pope. Knowing this, Savonarola took the initiative and sent out what became known
as his famous „Letters to the Princes„. These were sent to the sovereigns of France,
Spain, England, Hungary, and Germany. Each letter was almost identical in content in
describing the urgent crisis and need for action.
The moment of vengeance has arrived, the Lord commands me to reveal new
secrets, and make manifest to the world the peril by which the bark of St. Peter is
threatened, owing to your long neglect. The Church is all teeming with
abomination, from the crown of her head to the soles of her feet; yet not only do
you apply no remedy, but you do homage to the cause of the woes by which she
is polluted. Wherefore, the Lord is greatly angered, and has long left the Church
without a shepherd. Now, I hereby testify, as the Lord’s word, that this Alexander
be no Pope, nor can he be held as one; inasmuch as, leaving aside the mortal sin
of simony, by which he has purchased the Papal Chair, and daily sells the
benefices of the Church to the highest bidder, and likewise putting aside his other
manifest vices, I declare that he is no Christian, and believes in no God, and so
surpasses the height of all infidelity.63
The letters then invited all the princes of Christendom to summon a council as soon as
possible. Savonarola‟s chief confidence was in King Charles, because he knew he was
62 ibid.
63 Villari – Book 4 Ch 6.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
33
aware of the crisis and had a desire to call a council. So he was most keen to have a
reply to his letter from France. Instead he learned that the messenger sent with the
letter to France, had been robbed in Milan. The thieves realised the potent nature of the
letter and took it to the Duke of Milan who quickly delivered it to the Pope.
The Pope was in a rage and determined to use the documentary evidence that he now
had of the arrogance of the Prior and the complicity of the Council in Florence.
Trial by fire and arrest– April 1498. The most important preaching during Lent was
provided by Frà Francesco di Puglia, a Franciscan in the Church of St. Croce, and by Frà
Domenico, the Dominican brother who was preaching on behalf of his Prior. The
Franciscan gave much time to attacking Savonarola saying that he was a heretic and a
false prophet. But he went further and challenged him to prove the truth of his doctrines
by the „ordeal by fire‟.64 Frà Domenico took this attack personally because he felt that he
stood in the place of his Prior who had no opportunity to speak out to defend himself. He
said that he was willing to undergo the ordeal by fire because Savonarola needed to
reserve himself for greater things.
When the challenge was publicly known Savonarola had no time to be able to prevent it
happening. Some of his wealthy enemies convinced themselves that this was a
wonderful opportunity because; if he entered the fire he would be burnt. If he did not
take up the challenge then he would lose credibility and his followers would not protect
him; should there be an attempt to kill him. So they decided that they would give the
challenge maximum publicity. The trial by fire could no longer be avoided because the
city Council and the Pope were now insisting that it take place.
Savonarola would willingly have laid down his life and was appalled that an innocent life
should be risked for him. Reluctantly the Prior gave way in the face of Frà Domenico‟s
confidence and argument that the Lord would perform a miracle in order to confound the
Arrabiati and establish the truth of the new doctrine. He also reminded the Prior that he
had frequently said that his words would be confirmed by supernatural evidence. 65
On 1st April Savonarola gathered about 300 loyal supporters to St Mark‟s. He preached a
short sermon and outlined the situation. He said, ‘The time will come when the Lord shall
give supernatural signs and tokens; but this certainly cannot be at the command or at
the pleasure of man.’
Finally the 6th April was fixed as the date for the ordeal. Frà Domenico was to represent
the Dominicans and Frà Giuliano Rondinelli was accepted to represent the Franciscans.
From the moment the date was announced the community of St Mark‟s spent each day
in continual prayer. In the evening of 5th April they received a message from the Council
to say that the ordeal had been postponed to 7th April.
Paassen records the amazing hold that Savonarola still had and the fierce loyalty of his
friends –
On the 6th of April, 1498, Savonarola was still the effective and undisputed
64 This was a medieval form for determining guilt or innocence. A suspect was made to walk through a great fire and if they came out alive it was taken as a sign that God had protected the
innocent.
65 Villari – Book 4 Ch 7
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
34
master of the Florentine state. He counted influential friends in the Grand Council,
the magistracy, and the clergy. He had devoted partisans and admirers in the
ministries of justice and foreign affairs. The overwhelming majority of the
common people was on his side. Tens of thousands of adherents of the popular
party in the city and the country were willing and ready to lay down their lives for
him.66
Within twenty-four hours, in an eruption of lies, hate and barbarism, Savonarola would
be beaten and delivered up helpless to his enemies.
The day arrived and the preparations were made for the ordeal to take place in the
Piazza. Because the emotions of the whole crowd were so volatile, the two parties
decided to come with armed escorts in order to ensure their safety in the event of a riot.
It seemed as if the whole population was concentrated in the Piazza. People were at all
the windows of the houses round the Square, and all balconies and roofs. Savonarola
knew that among them in the Piazza were about a thousand men who planned to attack
him. Yet he remained calm.
Everyone was focussed on the erected platform, which was about 25 metres long and
piled up with bundles of wood. It was about a metre high and a metre wide. Beneath it
were wood, gunpowder, oil, pitch, and resin to ensure a great blaze. Frà Domenico, was
ready for the ordeal but the Franciscan representatives could not be found. The crowd
had been gathered for hours and were now losing patience and shouted that the fire
should be lighted on one side of the platform, while the friars entered from the other,
then the fire should be ignited behind them to block any escape.
The Arrabiati announced that a fraud had been uncovered and that Savonarola had
refused to let his representative go through the ordeal. The Franciscans claimed a victory
even though their man had not turned up! But the response of the crowd was violent
and they were ready to lynch the Prior. It was with great difficulty that the Dominicans
reached the safety of the Monastery. There they found the congregation still kneeling in
prayer and so Savonarola entered the pulpit and explained what had happened and then
went to his cell in deep distress; while the crowd still shouted threats and banged on the
doors of the monastery, trying to get in.
The „ordeal by fire’ was contrived and manipulated by the Arrabiati and for their
purposes it was a total success. The majority of the city was now totally against
Savonarola and his monks, because he had failed the challenge of the fire. Even his
friends began to believe the Arrabiati and doubt that he had either the courage or the
faith to really trust God.
The next morning, 8th April, was Palm Sunday. On the surface things seemed calm but it
was the calm before a storm. Savonarola preached in St. Mark‟s and said that he was
ready to lay down his life and he gave the people a blessing in a way that hinted that
this would be the last time he would speak to them.
Later the crowd poured into the square outside St. Mark‟s and found the church full of
people praying. They attacked them with a hail of stones and panic broke out. Somehow
the doors were locked and the church emptied, except for a few citizens who intended to
defend the church. As darkness fell the siege intensified and the mob broke in. They
66 Paassen – page 288
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
35
broke down several internal doors and came to the Chapel where the monks were
praying. Finding themselves under attack many of them fought back with whatever was
at hand – including wooden and metal crucifixes. Soon the Chapel was on fire.
The Council gave an order that Savonarola, Frà Domenico, and Frà Silvestro should
surrender themselves and they would not be harmed. Before surrendering Savonarola
addressed those friars present -
My beloved children …. My last exhortation to you is this: ‘let faith, prayer, and
patience be your weapons.’ I leave you with anguish and grief, to give myself into
my enemies’ hands. Take comfort, embrace the cross, and by it shall you find the
way of salvation.67
The pressing crowd seized Savonarola and Frà Domenico and ejected them into the
square in front of St. Mark‟s. The noise was so great that many thought the Prior had
that moment been killed by the rabble. It was one o‟clock in the morning when they had
them bound and took them to the Palace.
The officials communicated their actions to the Pope who was thrilled and declared the
Council to be true sons of the Church. He gave them absolution and blessing along with
his authorisation to examine, try, and torture the prisoners. But he made it very clear
that after trial the fate of the monks should be in his hands to carry through the
punishment they deserved. Even more thrilling for the Pope was the news that on the
same day as Savonarola‟s arrest, the King of France had died an ignominious death. In
the death of Charles, Savonarola lost his only hope of support and possible rescue.
Trial and torture - 26 April — 18 May, 1498. Frà Silvestro was captured later and
then each of the three prisoners was interrogated separately. Savonarola had been
tortured and examined repeatedly. The evil methods of torture had been developed in the
Spanish Inquisition68 and the monks were subjected to the rack and the boot. The rack
was a mechanism for pulling the arms and legs until they were twisted and out of joint.
The boot was a wooden framed shoe that was placed on one foot of the victim and was
tightened slowly and methodically to crush the bones of the foot and the lower leg.
Then from 25th of April until the Papal Commissioners arrived on 19th May, he had been
left quietly in his cell in the bell tower. At first he was so broken that he could do nothing,
but gradually he felt strength return to his right arm and he was able to write.
Being granted a pen and some paper, Savonarola began to write what would be a most
profound and widely circulated commentary on Psalm 5169, Miserere mei Deus. Lying on
the floor, he wrote –
67 Villari – Book 4 Ch 7.
68 The Spanish Inquisition began in 1478 when Spain's King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella wanted to do away with many of their political adversaries. These opponents were called the conversos, former Jews and Muslims who had been forced to convert to Christianity but had nevertheless managed to rise through the Spanish political and business ranks. They had no civil basis for removing these people so they asked for and received the approval of the Pope Sixtus IV, to torture those they thought were not true converts and by force elicit confessions which then gave
legal grounds for imposing the death penalty.
69 Psalm 50 in the Vulgate version
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
36
Sinner that I am, where shall I turn? To the Lord, whose mercy is infinite. None
may take glory in himself; all the saints tell us, ‘not unto us, but unto the Lord be
the glory’. They were not saved by their own merits, nor their own works; but by
the goodness and grace of God, wherefore none may take glory to himself. O
Lord, a thousand times You have wiped away my iniquity, yet a thousand times
have I fallen back into it. . . . But when Your Spirit shall descend upon me, when
Christ shall live within me; then shall I be safe. Strengthen me in your spirit, O
Lord. Not until then, can I teach your ways to the wicked. Had you asked the
sacrifice of my body, I would have given it before now; but burnt offerings are as
nothing to You; You would rather have the offering of the spirit. Therefore, O
sinner, bring your repentant heart unto the Lord, and nothing else shall be
required of you.
O incomprehensible God, to you I call because you are the reality, the sole reality,
the source and cause of all reality. You cannot change Your own essence and
nature. You must carry out your work which is to create, to love, to forgive, to
redeem, to bless. Look down upon my miserable state. My misery is great because
of my sins. I have sinned against you, against you who so loved me that you
came down from heaven to be crucified for me. O Lord, my God, my Rock and my
Redeemer, forgive, forgive my sins! Deep calls unto deep, the abyss of misery
calls to the abyss of divine mercy. The abyss of sin calls to the abyss of grace.
May Your abyss of mercy devour my abyss of sin and blot it out.
Then he continued –
Send the fire and the power and the love of the Holy Spirit upon your Church.
Your Church is so weak and feeble, dear Lord. There are so many millions in this
world who have not yet heard the words of truth and salvation from the holy
gospel. May the day not be far when all shall confess you as their Father and
know you as their Saviour. 70
This last sermon or meditation was sent to print immediately and became one of the
most influential pieces of Christian literature, remaining continuously in print in German
and Italian at least until the late 20th Century.71
As he ran out of paper, his last written words were –
Then, full of gladness, I exclaimed: I will put no trust in men, but only in the
Lord, and will return thanks before all the people, for the death of his saints is
precious in the Lord’s sight. If all the hosts of the world be arrayed against me,
70 Paassen – page 228
71 Luther, who published (1523) the expositions with a notable preface, declared them "a piece of evangelical teaching and Christian piety. For, in them Savonarola is seen entering in not as a Dominican monk, trusting in his vows, the rules of his order, his cowl and masses and good works but clad in the breastplate of righteousness and armed with the shield of faith and the helmet of salvation, not as a member of the Order of Preachers but as an everyday Christian." Weimar ed. XII. 248. Within 50 years it had been translated into Spanish, German, English and French. In
Italy, it was used as a tract and put into the hands of prisoners condemned to death. It was embodied in the Salisbury Primer, 1538, and in Henry VIII‟s Primer, 1543.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
37
my heart shall know no fear, for You are my refuge and will lead me to my end.72
Condemnation and execution 19-23 May 1498. When the Papal Commissioners
arrived in Florence on 19th May, they immediately dispelled any idea of a fair trial by
announcing that Savonarola would „die without fail’. They even had documents from
Rome instructing them to put him to death whatever the outcome of the trial. One of
them even declared, ‘We shall make a fine bonfire; I bear the sentence with me, already
prepared.’ 73
On 22nd May, after they had questioned him further, it was decided that they would not
be going to get the confession they wanted so they informed him that he would appear
before them the next day to receive his sentence. Finally that night, the sentences were
read to the prisoners. They were to be hanged and then burnt. Savonarola was asked if
he had a last request and he asked to be able to have a little time with the other two
monks. This was granted and the emotions must have been extraordinary as the three
friends met up again for the first time in more than forty days.
Savonarola urged them to go to their deaths – „following the example of the Lord Jesus
Christ, who went quietly and did not protest his innocence’. Their thoughts should be
fixed on God. He then gave them a blessing and they were parted from each other
again.
The next morning the three were allowed to meet for Communion and Savonarola
officiated. Then they were led to the Piazza where three platforms had been erected on
which stood three gibbets, each in the form of a cross. Attached to the gibbets were
chains with which to hang the monks and also to hold their corpses while they were
burnt.
The Bishop of Vasona read the Pope‟s mandate, and as he pronounced the degradation
he took Savonarola by the arm and in confusion said, „Separo te ab Ecclesia militante
atque triumphante.‟ Savonarola calmly corrected him saying: ‘Militante, non
triumphante: hoc enim tuum non est.‟ His formula referred to the Church on earth
(Militant) and the Church made up of those in heaven (Triumphant). He had announced,
„I exclude you from the militant and triumphant Church.‟ Savonarola‟s response was,
‘From the Church militant you may but from the Church triumphant you cannot’ 74
With great dignity and calm the three mounted the platforms. The Piazza was silent. The
first to be hung was Frà Silvestro, then Frà Domenico and then Savonarola. He was
forty-five years of age when his life was taken from him at 10 am. on 23rd May, 1498.
Pope Alexander VI. immediately issued a prohibition of the Prior‟s writings, but later
relaxed this and the writings were allowed to circulate informally. Being freed from the
criticism of the Prior, the Pope now became more immoral and irreligious in his actions
resorting to numerous assassinations and other crimes.
In 1901 a memorial slab of marble, was placed in the Piazza, on the spot where
Savonarola was executed. The inscription says, ‘Here, where with his brethren, Fra
Domenico Buonvicini and Fra Silvestro Maruffi, on May 23, 1498, by an iniquitous
72 Paassen – page 228
73 Villari – Book 4 Ch 11.
74 Villari – Book 4 Ch 11.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
38
sentence, Fra Girolamo Savonarola was hanged and burned, this memorial has been
placed after four centuries.’
4 The forgotten Father of Apologetics
He is the Father of the fullest and clearest Apologetic purpose.
Those before him, including Tertullian, Augustine, Athanasius, Anselm, Aquinas,
had a narrower Apologetic purpose for their arguments and their careful
reasonings are more narrowly focussed.
He is the Father of the most comprehensive method of presenting the Christian
Apologetic as an integrated whole.
c) He is the Father of an approach that is so competent that it is as effective in
dealing with the issues of the 21st Century as it was those of his day of the
15th Century.
d) He is the Father of the only approach that can provide an
answer for the weaknesses and blunders in present day Apologetics.
A brief history of Apologetics
The term „Apologetics‟ did not really come into formal use until it was adopted by
Friedrich D E Schleiermacher (1768 – 1834) to describe a particular theological discipline
or category of theological science. The term is derived from the Greek ‘apologeisthai’,
which embodies as its central notion the idea of 'defence.' But the Apologetic task was
being undertaken for centuries before it was given a formal title.
It is obvious from the history of Apologetics that there have been others who have made
major contributions. However I believe that the schema of Savonarola is of unique
significance and this is why I entitle him as Father of Apologetics.
Others presented a fragmented approach and sometimes they were even dismissive of
Apologetics. One of the greatest of the early theologians, Tertullian, asked the famous
rhetorical question, „What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?’ The implied answer was
„Nothing.‟ Tertullian urged the position, revived periodically, that since Christian
revelation contains all truth necessary to salvation, there is no need to dabble in pagan
wisdom and human reasoning.
Those writers who did engage in Apologetics generally had a narrow focus and addressed
issues that were of immediate concern rather than formulated a holistic Apologetic. One
of the first notable apologists was Justin Martyr (c. 100-165), a convert to Christianity
from Platonism. In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, he tried to prove that Jesus is the
Messiah by reference to messianic prophecies from the Hebrew Scriptures. In his two
Apologies he appealed for tolerance for Christianity by refuting lies and rumours that had
been spread against the faith. (Lies such as, Christians eat the flesh and drink the blood
of a child, born of a virgin.) He was engaged in an apologetic activity even at a time
before the New Testament canon had been fixed.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
39
Clement of Alexandria (c.150-215) wrote an apologetic work called Protrepticus, which
was more carefully reasoned than the earlier work of Justin Martyr.
Origen (c. 185-254) was the first to get into lengthy syllogisms as opposed to proof
texts. In his Contra Celsum, „Against Celsus’ he specifically refuted the criticism of
Celsus, who had rejected the history, ethics and philosophy of Christianity.
Augustine (354-430), the bishop of Hippo, was writing in a different age when
Christianity had become the dominant Worldview in the empire following the conversion
of Constantine. After his dramatic conversion he became the greatest theologian and
apologist up to that period. He wrote many diversified works on Apologetics and was the
first to build on St Paul‟s doctrine of the sovereignty of God in personal salvation. This
meant that his focus was on the doctrine of salvation, rather than defending the Church
from persecution and open attack. He believed that reason precedes faith in recognising
what is proposed is rational, but faith precedes reason when it comes to recognising the
loving offer of an invisible God. ‘For understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore do
not seek to understand in order to believe, but believe that you may understand.’ For
him, both faith and reason were supernatural gifts of God‟s activity in a person‟s life.
His philosophy was most fully developed in his greatest work, The City of God, which
was to be a strong influence in the thinking of Savonarola and may have partly been
influential in him coming to personal faith. We can see his influence on Savonarola in the
way he wove certain proofs together to affirm faith. He appealed to fulfilled prophecy,
the miracles of the bible and the miracle of thousands converting to Christianity in the
face of persecution.
Anselm (1033-1109) In the Middle Ages the Church had become established as the
central organ of western culture. So Apologetics became a scholastic exercise and
addressed philosophical issues. Two of the thinkers of this period stand out as apologists
and their ideas are still read and debated today. They were Anselm and Thomas Aquinas.
Anselm was Archbishop of Canterbury, and he built on Augustine‟s ideas of faith and
reason, emphasising that faith comes before reason in the regeneration of the sinner.
Once a person had come to faith then reason should be employed so that they may
come to an understanding of the Faith.
His key Apologetic idea has become known as the ontological argument. From the
Greek word „ontos’ meaning being. This argument can be interpreted in several ways
and is often rejected as an effective proof for God‟s existence. At its core is the
proposition that a God who can be conceived of as existing, must exist, because the
universe demands some reality to the concept of existence and being. Anselm said that
he wrote at the request of believers who felt their faith was being challenged and so he
clearly had an Apologetic purpose. But he was clear that people should put their faith in
Christ and not in some apologetic argument.
Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), taught at a time when the Arabs in Spain had re-
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
40
introduced the philosophy of Aristotle, to Christian Europe. His Summa Theologiae was a
systematic theology intended to counter Aristotle, but utilising many of his concepts
regarding knowledge. In his Apologetic introduction he asserts that some of God‟s truths
can be discerned by human reasoning, while other truths about God are only available
through divine revelation and a response of faith.
His key apologetic arguments are known as his five ways 75; five arguments for the
existence of God. God‟s existence may be inferred from the nature of the world as
changing, causative, contingent, graduated, and ordered (the five ways). Like Augustine
he also appealed to the conversion of the masses, fulfilled prophecy, and miracles.
In what sense is Savonarola a Father of Apologetics?
In claiming that Savonarola is a Father of Apologetics, it is important not to claim too
much. There were great Christian thinkers before him, whom he would acknowledge as
strong influences in his own life and reasoning. So I am not claiming that he was the first
apologist or that the others were faulty in their approach and he was the first to get
things right.
What I am asserting is that he was the first to clearly define the limits, the purpose, the
premises and to provide a totally holistic schema of the Christian Philosophy. He is the
one who thought through the implications of divine revelation in relation to faith and
reason. He is the one who introduces a clear concept of the action of grace in drawing us
to Christ. And his holistic approach means that the reader is not brought simply to a first
cause, as in Aquinas or Anselm, but actually brought to Christ as saviour, who is
absolutely central to the whole schema.
5 The forgotten Father of Apologetics
His major work, The Triumph of the Cross, has been unavailable for over one
hundred years. It was known and its teaching valued by the Christian leaders of the
late 19th Century, but now it is unknown.
His integrated approach with the whole of Christianity as the Apologetic argument
has been forgotten and lost, by today‟s apologists.
Failure to heed his insights and adopt his approach led to a loss of nerve and
confusion in 20th Century Apologetics.
I claim that he is the forgotten Father of Apologetics, because in the past he had great
influence and his teaching was highly valued. But in the English-speaking world, after his
work received significant attention in the Victorian period, it then began to fade from
memory. What did remain were some of his concise syllogisms, that are still quoted
75 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, 1a. 2,3.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
41
today, but usually by people who have no idea of their provenance. Eventually his major
work went out of print and became unavailable, except in two or three academic
libraries.
In a few pages, it is worth recording how this amnesia set in; following a strong
appreciation at the beginning.
Those who were inspired by Savonarola and mourned his death, did not leave the
Catholic Church but remained loyal. In the 18th Century, Pope Benedict XIV judged him
worthy of canonization and some of his works were used as textbooks for Catholic
schools. 76
And it is impossible for anyone to read them without being firmly convinced that,
to the day of his death, Savonarola remained unswervingly faithful to the dogmas
of his faith; and that instead of seeking to destroy the unity of the Church, it was
his constant desire to render it still more complete.77
The Triumph of the Cross went through many editions in the 15th Century. Later
printings made it available in Spanish, German, French, Hungarian, Provençal, and
Flemish. It became a key text in the curriculum at the College for the Propaganda of the
Faith in Rome where those training to be missionaries were taught.
Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475 – 1504). It is probably through Savonarola‟s sermons
and writings that Michelangelo came to faith in Christ. It is said that these sermons were
the inspiration for the artist‟s painting of the Sistine chapel, which was accomplished a
few years after the Prior‟s death. During the whole project, his only reading material was
a Bible and a copy of the sermons of Savonarola. 78
Protestant Reformers, many reformers saw him as a courageous forerunner. John
Calvin (1509 – 1564) and Martin Luther (1483 – 1546) both held Savonarola in high
regard and valued his writings. Luther published Savonarola‟s Commentary on Psalm 51,
which had been written in prison, and declared Savonarola to be a precursor of the
Protestant doctrine and one of the martyrs of the Reformation. Luther called him a saint,
writing -
This man was put to death solely for having desired that someone should come to
purify the slough of Rome. It was the Antichrist’s (Pope‟s) hope that all
remembrance of this great man would perish under a load of malediction; but you
see that it still lives and that his memory is blessed. Jesus Christ proclaims him a
saint through our lips, even though Pope and Papists should burst with rage. Even
by these writings, you shall see how works are of no avail in God’s sight, and how
faith is the one thing needful. What if some theological mud be still found sticking
76 His Trionfo della Croce was republished by the Propaganda Fide; his Semplicità della Vita Cristiana was translated by a Jesuit into French and republished in Paris in 1672; his Confessionale was frequently reprinted, with very slight alterations, and used as a Manual for confessors.
77 Villari – Book 4, Conclusion
78 Charles De Tolnay, The Youth of Michelangelo, Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ. 1943. Page 20.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
42
to his feet, who could be altogether free of it in those days? You wilt likewise see
his distrust and despair of his own strength, and a pure image of faith and hope
in God’s mercy. Neither in the strength of his vows nor the rule of his Order,
neither in his priestly robe, in masses, nor in works, did he rest his hope, but
solely in the Gospel, in faith, and in righteousness. 79
In 1868, an attempt was made to claim Savonarola as one of the precursors of the
Reformation, by placing his name on the monument for Martin Luther, erected at Worms
in Germany. A French Dominican, Père M. Rouard, protested against this in a pamphlet
in defence of Savonarola‟s Catholic orthodoxy.80 But the major focus of the Reformation
was on the Church and so Luther and Calvin did not make great use of his apologetic
material.
John Colet. (1467 - 1519) In England he was a prime influence in the life and ministry
of John Colet, who had been in Florence and studied with the Prior. He returned to
England in 1496 and began to preach in the style of Savonarola. He interpreted
Humanism with a Christian bias believing the Scriptures are the final authority for the
believer and the full revelation of salvation. Like the Prior, he attacked the abuses and
idolatry in the Church. Though he wanted reformation, he would never have considered
leaving the Catholic Church. Like his Florentine hero, he went on to be charged with
heresy, in 1512, but the Bishop of London dismissed the case. Colet became Dean of St
Paul‟s Cathedral in London and the founder of St Paul‟s School. Through Colet, the
Triumph of the Cross became very influential in the life of the English Church and
particularly guided those who composed the Book of Common Prayer.
Lacordaire (1802 – 1861), the great Dominican preacher of Notre Dame in Paris, used
The Triumph of the Cross as the basis for a series of sermons and he praised the Prior
for his extensive learning which „embraced nearly the whole philosophic knowledge of his
time.‟ 81
Bias in use.
There has often been a strong bias in the approach of translators and in the way this
text has been used.
Odell Travers Hill Translation 1868. Travers Hill in his preface to his introduction,
talks about Savonarola as an apologist.
That the execution of the work, its rigid adherence to its first principle, its
freedom from all sectarian spirit, from all scholastic cripplings, its close
79 Villari – Book 4 Chapter 10
80 This was translated and published by Comm. C. Guasti in the Rivista Universale, Annali
Cattolici, vol. V. Genoa and Florence, 1867.
81 Paassen – page 247
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
43
consecutive reasoning, its earnestness, convince us that its author was a man far
in advance of his age. In point of style it might have been written yesterday, a
marvellous work and by one of our greatest intellects.
The translator feels justified therefore in bringing this valuable work before the
English public for the first time. He has searched in vain for any trace of an
English translation, and can only find that an abbreviated addition, about one-
third of the volume, was brought out in Puritan times, dedicated to the scoffers
and scholars of gospel in those days; an edition long extinct. This translation has
been made from a valuable copy printed with all the abbreviations peculiar to
Savonarola's manuscript and found in the archives of Sion College.
Travers Hill‟s translation ignores completely the whole of chapters 15, 16 and 18. These
chapters refer to the seven sacraments. Proctor says, ‘All of this is to make Savonarola
a Protestant and a precursor to Luther and Calvin, whereas he was a true Catholic.’ 82
His Introduction83 to his translation has many errors and he is confused about dates and
the order of the Medici rulers.
Travers Hill shows his Evangelical bias in his preface, stating, „This is a rational defence
of Christianity, conducted without appeal to authority or tradition. This book is free from
all sectarian feelings.’ In writing this, Travers Hill is as guilty of bending the evidence as
Proctor is in making his criticism. Savonarola in this work does provide a most effective
apologetic for the primary truths of orthodox Christianity, but he also includes strong
affirmation of secondary dogmas of the Catholic Church of his day. Dogmas which would
be seen as most sectarian and refuted by the major Church Reformers – such as Luther
and Calvin.
Proctor in his introduction, says that Travers Hill is not an honest translation, because
whole chapters are left out to make the work palatable to a particular readership. He
says, ‘To claim it is a translation is to claim a garden fence in London is the Great Wall of
China or Primrose Hill is a replica of the Alps. It removes all reference to Mary, the host
of the Communion, chalice and relics.’ 84
Fr. John Proctor’s Translation 1901. Proctor‟s assertion that Travers Hill has edited
the text to deliberately make Savonarola look like a Reformer, is not entirely fair. This is
because Savonarola‟s whole life was a passion for reformation. It is also factually untrue
when Proctor says that Travers Hill‟s translation removes all Catholic dogma.
Proctor as Provincial of the Dominicans, was wanting to rehabilitate Savonarola, a fellow
Dominican.85 As a result, he reads with a Roman Catholic bias and misses the
importance of some of Savonarola's points regarding reform and salvation by grace
82 John Proctor, translator, The Triumph of the Cross, Sands and Company, London, 1901. from Introduction.
83 O'Dell Travers Hill, translator, The Triumph Of The Cross, Hodder, London 1868. Introduction
84 John Proctor, translator, The Triumph of the Cross, Sands and Company, London, 1901. from Introduction.
85 The Dominicans have never disowned Savonarola and have made moves to have him beatified.
This has always been opposed by the Jesuits who condemn him because of his call for the overthrow of the Papacy of Alexander Borgia.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
44
alone.
He defends Savonarola as if he were an orthodox Catholic who had always been in faith
and harmony with the Roman Church. But he completely misses the context of the open
conflict between Savonarola and the Popes and the leaders of the Church in Rome. On
one occasion Savonarola wrote to the kings of France, England, Spain, and Germany,
urging them to depose Pope Alexander Borgia and to form a Council to reform the
Church. He was tortured to make him recant his teaching and the Church declared him
to be a heretic, and put him to death. The Dominicans say this was unjust (certainly his
conviction was irregular) but the Jesuits say it was justified because in challenging the
Pope, he opposed God‟s office holder.
Evangelicals of the 19th and 20th Centuries. Proctor in his Introduction, objects
strongly to the way the Victorian Evangelicals had celebrated Savonarola and his
writings. He claims that the Friar was a true Catholic and never a Reformer. He writes,
Villari says Savonarola's attacks are never against dogmas of the Church but
solely against those who corrupted them. The Savonarola of the English is one
created by non-Catholics and by anti-Catholic romantics and unscrupulous
translators. 86
Proctor writes in this way because Victorian Evangelicals had found a great apologetic
tool in the Travers Hill translation, and went on to promote Savonarola as a pre-
Reformer.
Charles Haddon Spurgeon, (1834 – 1892). Spurgeon in his publication, The Sword
and the Trowel, The Florentine Monk, April 1869, used the work of Travers Hill, published
the previous year, to adopt Savonarola as the patron of a new Evangelical movement in
Florence in 1869. But he also makes a judgement of this work –
The question has often been asked, How far was Savonarola the herald of
Protestantism? The best answer to that question is, we think, furnished in his
admirable work—far ahead of the times in which it was written—’The Triumph of
the Cross.’ We are glad that those enterprising publishers, Messrs. Hodder and
Stoughton have brought it out in a cheap and handsome form. For the sake of the
memory of the martyr, it should be read; for the sake of the truths it so
luminously sets forth, it deserves a wide circulation. Mr. Travers Hill, beside
writing an interesting sketch of the Italian Reformer's life, has ably translated the
work. At a time when the church held every one in bondage, when the Scriptures
were hid from view, and the masses were ignorant of the way of salvation—when
darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the people—when the church to
which every one bowed in lowly submission was so corrupt as to allow a pope
stained with every crime to preside over it—and when Luther's shrill testimony
had not as yet been given—it is pleasant to find words of such evangelic power
written in the cloister of a monastery. Though Savonarola was wedded to many of
the errors of the church, yet his testimony in favour of justification by faith and
86 John Proctor, translator, The Triumph of the Cross, Sands and Company, London, 1901. from Introduction.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
45
not by works, the forgiveness of sins by Christ and not by man, was clear and
decisive. His object was undoubtedly to purify the Church of Rome, not to destroy
it; but it is evident that throughout his life he was, if loyal to his Church, far more
loyal to Christ.87
Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield (1851 – 1921) was the principal of Princeton
Seminary in the USA. Through the Travers Hill translation he was aware of The Triumph
of the Cross, and he speaks of Savonarola as an apologist. His own work on Apologetics
draws on the teaching of Savonarola.
The Renaissance, with its repristination of heathenism, naturally called out a
series of new apologists (Savonarola, Marsilius Ficinus, Ludovicus Vives), but the
Reformation forced polemics into the foreground and drove Apologetics out of
sight, although, of course, the great theologians of the Reformation era brought
their rich contribution to the accumulating apologetical material.88
Clive Staples Lewis (1898 – 1963). CS Lewis, the Irish Professor of Literature, was a
popular writer on Apologetics. His specialist area of study was the literature of the
Renaissance and he makes use of several of the apologetic syllogisms of Savonarola.
These consist of concise deductive arguments, which have a power and beauty in their
brevity and simplicity.
Let us approach the issue in this way - either Christ is the true God and the First
Cause of all things, or He is not. 89 If He is God, it follows that Christianity is true;
and there is no need for further discussion. If He is not God, He must have been
the proudest man, and the greatest liar that ever lived. He must also have been
exceedingly foolish. 90
This attitude toward Savonarola among Victorian USA and UK Evangelicals was revived
almost one hundred years later, in 1961, when a précis of Travers Hill‟s translation was
published in a volume called Valiant for the Truth.
87 CH Spurgeon in his publication, The Sword and the Trowel, The Florentine Monk,
London,1869.
88 BB Warfield, Apologetics; available at www.graceonlinelibrary.org/articles/full
89 C. S. Lewis famously uses this argument in his book, Mere Christianity,
I'm trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about him: 'I am ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic on a level with the man who
says he is a poached egg or else he would be the devil of hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon; or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. - Mere Christianity, Collins, London 1952 pages 51-53.
90 TOTC –page 121
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
46
Joachim Weinhardt (1998) In continental Europe The Triumph of the Cross has been
better known and available in German and Italian. As recently as 1998, Joachim
Weinhardt wrote his PhD thesis on, „Savonarola als Apologet‟, for the University of
Tubingen, Germany. This was published by Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, in 2003.
From his Abstract, it is clear that the thrust of his thesis is to establish that Savonarola
built his Apologetics on Aristotelian empiricism and deductive methodology. It would
appear that his interest is in the origin of the ideas rather than in the analysis of the
schema that makes up The Triumph of the Cross.
Forgotten by 21st Century Apologists
But now his schema and his writing are forgotten or have never been known by the
majority of serious Apologists. A close inspection of the wide range of writings from
Christians such as Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, John Warwick Montgomery, Josh
MacDowell, Phil Fernandes, and many others, reveals nothing of any significance or
understanding of Savonarola. The 400 page Handbook of Christian Apologetics:
Hundreds of Answers to Crucial Questions; by Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli,91 has
an extensive listing of apologists – but no mention of Savonarola.
Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig are known for being leading proponents of
Molinism92, yet seem unaware that the teaching of Molin was not original but based on
Savonarola.
As we shall see, if today‟s apologists were aware of Savonarola‟s teaching they would
have found the key to several of the Apologetic problems of presentation.
One who has not overlooked Savonarola is Cardinal Avery Dulles, the foremost Catholic
Apologist. But his references93 to him are restricted to note his historical context and
that he was influenced by Aquinas.
Today‟s Catholics often hold Savonarola in high esteem and think that the church could
still stand some reform. As mentioned earlier, a new Italian edition was published in
2001, Il trionfo della croce. La ragionevolezza della fede: „The Triumph of the
Cross. The reasonableness of faith‟ by Prof. Giorgio Carbone OP and published by
Edizioni Studio Domenicano, in Italy. This Dominican publisher continues to seek the
rehabilitation of Savonarola and the publication seeks to use the work as an apologetic
(defence) for Savonarola as well as a foundation for faith.
6 His Authority
91 Published by Inter Varsity Press, Downers Grove.1994.
92 An explanation of Molinism is given later in this thesis.
93 Avery Dulles, A History of Apologetics, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2005
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
47
He preached prophetically and in a way that sounded as if his revelations were the
authority for what he said. But closer examination shows that he had little confidence in
himself as an authority to be appealed to in argument. His writings and sermons are
permeated with Scripture as the final authority, though he did regard his ordination and
license to preach as authority conferred upon him by Christ through the Church. But that
Church only has authority when it itself is under authority. Explicitly he gave special
emphasis to the authority of the Bible, over the Church. ‘I preach the regeneration of
the church, taking the Scriptures as my sole guide.’
7 His use of Scripture
For Savonarola the key to interpreting the Scriptures was to be found in prayer and a
prayerful submissive attitude before the Word of God. He quotes the words of Jesus
concerning the need for „spirit and truth‟ in the worshipper, and applies it to the
ceremonies and exterior rites of the Church in its approach to Scripture. ‘The hour
comes, and now is, when true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth'
John 4: 21-23.
He saw the interface with Scripture as an opportunity to meet with Christ and to
understand something of the mind of Christ. The reader should be inspired by Scripture.
„The love of Jesus Christ is the lively affection inspiring the faithful with the desire to
bring his soul into unity, as it were, with that of Christ, and live the life of the Lord, not
by external imitation, but by inward and Divine inspiration.’ 94
His foundational belief was in the final authority of Scripture. This was not a belief that
was held by most of his contemporaries who normally looked for direction from earthly
authorities. This is the reason for him not claiming or appealing to any authority in his
Triumph of the Cross. He writes, „We will not appeal to any authority, no matter how
learned they may be. Instead, we shall proceed as if we had confidence in no one, and
depend on reason alone.’ 95
For him it was natural to trust the authority of Scripture and he could not understand
how anyone could resist the Word of the Lord. It was the Bible that had been his guide
as a youth; his consolation in grief and it had educated and formed his mind. As noted, it
is probable that he had memorised the whole Bible before the age of twenty.
The Bible was his main focus of study and meditation. For him it was a living means of
communication, revelation and inspiration. He could not even open the Bible without a
sense of awe at holding and reading the Word from God.
As taught by his grandfather, he continued to cover the margins of his Bible with notes
to record his insights and interpretations of each passage. Though he seemed able to
find a Scripture to describe and direct every course of action, yet he was careful about
using proof texts. He urged great care in coming to an interpretation of a passage. He
wrote the following directions in one of his marginal notes –
94 Villari – Book 1 Ch 7.
95 TOTC – Page 82
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
48
It is necessary to be acquainted with languages and history, to continually read
and have long familiarity (with the Bible); it is necessary to be careful not to run
counter to reason. We must not turn the Bible to our own ends, for by so doing
the human intellect would usurp the place of the Divine Word.
Divine grace shall be his guide. Therefore let the faithful prepare himself to read
the Bible by great purity of heart, by long practice of charity, by raising his
thoughts above earthly things; for we may not comprehend this book by the
intellect alone, but must also bring our heart and soul to the task. Only in this
way can we enter without peril into this infinite world of the Holy Scriptures, and
obtain the light needed for our salvation.96
His sermons and his writings reveal his practical hermeneutical approach. His first step
was to try to determine the plain meaning of the text. To do this he analysed the text by
reference to the original languages of Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. Next he took note of
the historical context of the text and also gave due attention to the literary genre of the
text – prophetic, narrative, poetic, apocalyptic, etc.
Having looked at the plain meaning and message of the text and what it might have
meant for the original author and readership, he moved to his next focus of attention.
What was the reason that the Holy Spirit had for including the text in Scripture and
preserving it for the instruction and correction of his generation? At this stage his
method was to assign each passage to four categories of interpretation - spiritual, moral,
allegorical, and anagogical (mystical).
Looking back on this period from our vantage point in the 21st Century we need to
realise that most people at most places and at most times in the history of the
Church – have not had access to a Bible. In our day we have developed a devotional
discipline expected of each believer that involves reading and reflecting on the
Scriptures. What we have to realise is that for most people that form of devotion was an
impossibility. Therefore there was more emphasis on the public reading of Scripture and
a spirituality that focussed more on the sacraments and the Church. The fact that for
long periods only the clergy had access to the Scriptures, gave them a position of power.
Savonarola lived at the moment of change. Printing had made the Scriptures available to
many and would soon enable all literate people to have their own copy. His response
was to elevate, teach and expound the Scriptures – and then send the people to read
the Word for themselves.
8 His use of Philosophy
Savonarola was of the opinion that: 'An old woman knows more about the Faith than
Plato.' 97 This was his response to a city filled with the philosophy of Plato and the
ancients which came from the east through the teaching of those expelled from
96 Villari – Book 1 Ch 7.
97 V. H. H. Green, Renaissance and Reformation: A Survey of European History between 1450 and 1660; Edward Arnold, London. 1952. Page 118.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
49
Constantinople, and with the philosophy of Aristotle from the west through Islamic
Scholars expelled from Spain.
His own early education had centred on the teaching of the Dominican, Aquinas, and the
philosophy of Aristotle. On arrival in Florence he met up with Marsilio Ficino of the
Platonic Academy. He always evaluated every philosophy by the one fundamental
certainty which he held – that man has a purpose and that the grace of God has made
provision in Christ to enable that purpose to be fulfilled.
It is right here that he parts company with Aquinas who conceded too much to Aristotle.
As the Cambridge Academic, Angela Tilby has carefully explained –
Thomas Aquinas the great Dominican theologian of the 12th Century, believed in
the authority of Scripture, but tried to marry this to the insights of deductive
reason. His whole theological achievement was an attempt to reconcile Christian
doctrine with the philosophy of Aristotle. 98
Up to Aquinas the Church had tended toward the philosophy of Plato with its emphasis
on „essence’ as the true reality. This concept saw the present world as transient and the
objects we experience with our senses as changeable, but the essence of these objects
was fixed and eternal; existing in some spiritual realm. This was easy for the Church to
accommodate with its teaching on the division of the universe into the inherently
imperfect, corrupt world of material existence and the perfect , heavenly world of the
Spirit.
Aristotle maintained that „existence‟ is primary and that what we experience through our
senses is reality. According to Plato, existence, or the everyday world of objects such as
tables, chairs, and dogs, is inherently inferior to essence. Savonarola concluded that
Plato‟s theory was deficient, because it is unable to explain the origin of existence. Both
of the two ancient philosophies led to deficient definitions of the human soul, reality and
creation.
Again, if any one will read the philosophical books dealing with the universe, its
purpose, and its supposed beginning and end, he will find almost as many errors
as there are words. And, although Aristotle and some of his followers have tried
to prove that the world is eternal, the Aristotelian arguments are so weak, that
any educated man could easily refute them.99
Savonarola takes the concept of „essence’ and says that the real „essence’ is within.
It cannot be denied that an intelligent mind is the essence of what makes us
human. Everyone acknowledges that it is the rationality of man which
distinguishes him from other animals. This distinction could not exist if a rational
soul were not the essence of a man. 100
The Prior‟s principle objection to Aristotle and Plato was that their whole philosophy goes
98 Angela Tilby, Science and the Soul, SPCK, London 1992, page 121
99 TOTC – Page 172.
100 TOTC – Page 98.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
50
nowhere but stops at the contemplation of speculative science. In his Sermon 22 on the
Book of Exodus, he underlined his position:
And I say this because some people want to make all of Plato Christian. Rather,
let Plato be Plato and Aristotle be Aristotle; do not make them Christians, because
they are not.101
In the Triumph of the Cross, he asserts –
Philosophers entangle themselves as they try to discover the goal of human life,
by natural reason. Nor can they be expected to speak with certainty or clarity
about religion or about virtuous living when they ignore the most important
element of life. We need not, therefore, be surprised, that the religious systems
of the philosophers are imperfect, and filled with error.102
He was obviously a child of his age with the same scientific assumptions as his fellows.
For example, this means that he understands the principles of gravity, but not the laws
governing it. So he accepts and argues from the Greek philosophical concept of the
elements.
The stars and planets are more remote from earth than the elements103, and the
elements are universal causes of things on earth104
He also accepts the principles of philosophical thought and in The Triumph of the Cross,
he gratefully uses the science of logic - particularly using inductive arguments to proceed
from the known to the unknown.
9 His use of logic
Aristotle believed that nothing exists within the conscious mind that has not been
experienced first by the senses. All our thoughts and ideas have come into our
consciousness through what we have heard and seen. But we also have innate power of
reason. He saw this as the most distinguishing faculty of humanity but still believed that
our reasoning is completely empty until we have sensed something. So we have no
innate ideas.
He also noticed that the reasoning method of the human mind is to classify and group
experiences and entities. He began a study of the real world believing that everything
101 Timothy Verdon Contributor, John Henderson, editor, Christianity and the Renaissance: Image and Religious Imagination in the Quattrocento, Syracuse University Press. Syracuse, NY. 1990. Page 527.
102 TOTC – Page 171.
103 Elements – in Greek philosophy the four elements are fire, earth, air and water. They were
seen as the cause of weather and climate.
104 TOTC – Page 176.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
51
could be categorised and organised. From this organising of categories he went on to
develop his idea of logic - which was a way of reasoning about the relationships between
categories.
When Thomas Aquinas took up the insights of Aristotle, he embraced the ideal of
categories and became a prolific writer and great systematiser of ideas. Colin Brown
suggests that much of his thought was not original, but what he learned from others was
worked into great schemes – particularly in his Summa Theologiae. In this he presented
a synthesis of Aristotelian logic and Christian theology in the conviction that there can be
no contradiction between the truths of faith, based on divine revelation, and those of
human reason. Some truths, such as that of the mystery of the incarnation, can be
known only through revelation, and others, such as that of the material world, only
through experience; still others, such as that of the existence of God, are known through
both equally. All knowledge originates in sensation, but sense data can be made
intelligible only by the activity of the intellect, which elevates thought toward knowledge
of God.
Savonarola took up the deductive logic of Aristotle and the insights of Aquinas, because
they provided the „grammar’ to enable him to reason and communicate.
It is interesting to note that even though the Protestant Reformers demanded total
reliance on Scripture, they too, relied on Aristotle‟s methods to engage in theological
reasoning as well as in biblical interpretation. All of them had been taught his deductive
logic and gave reason an important place in their theology. Luther used reason as a
means to develop a dogmatic theology. While Calvin was able to interpret some
Scriptures simply by appeal to the teaching of Aristotle105. When they debated and
argued, they used scholastic logic; seen especially in such documents as those produced
at the Synod of Dort. This is the form of argument Savonarola uses. It is lifted from the
method of Aquinas in his Summa Theologiae. The argument is presented, then the
counter argument is considered and finally a rebuttal of the counter argument is offered.
10 His Apologetic Purpose
Why do we need Apologetics? Who is the target audience? What is the purpose?.
Savonarola helps us see what Apologetics involves and how it relates to faith. But most
powerfully he defines the role and purpose of Apologetics.
The Scriptures command our involvement in the apologetic task and he expounds the
teaching it gives -
1 Peter 3:15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to
give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope
that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
Titus 1:9 He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught,
105 A case in point is Calvin’s explanation of predestination in Ephesians 1:5 in which he drew on Aristotle’s fourfold notion of causation. What is interesting in this passage is the fact that Calvin adopts without question Aristotelian categories in order to express his understanding of Biblical
teaching. Colin Brown, Christianity And Western Thought, Volume One, Inter Varsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois, 1990. Page 153
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
52
so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who
oppose it.
Jude 1:3 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the
salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith
that was once for all entrusted to the saints.
We are called to – be prepared with reasons and answers, to encourage, oppose, and
contend for the Truth, which has been revealed. The purpose is -
To confirm the faith of people whose belief has been shaken106
He wanted to re-affirm the faith of those who had been shaken by the secular „wisdom of
their day‟. In doing this he sought to protect the weak and guard the faithful. He wanted
to help faith come to an understanding of itself – to become settled in the mind and
heart of the believer. Here, like Anselm in his celebrated phrase Credo ut Intelligam – „I
believe so that I may understand’, faith comes first and is not created by the reasoning.
We are not saying that these proofs are what cause Christians to believe.
Christians are established in their faith through the special revelation of God;
otherwise, their faith would not be a matter of trust, but opinion. But such
evidences confirm us in our Faith, and prove to our adversaries that our believing
is not mindless, but thoughtful and with intellectual rigour. 107
There are those who are enlightened by God, and have embraced the Faith,
without proofs. They then go on to strengthen their own belief and that of others,
by investigating the grounds of their faith. These deserve praise because they
obey the instruction of St. Peter ‘in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always
be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for
the hope that you have’. (1 Peter 3:15) 108
This purpose of protecting and preserving faith is fundamentally important. We have
grossly underestimated the way in which our young people have had their faith eaten
away and some who have looked for reassurance but found no answers have turned into
the fiercest opponents of the Christian faith. 109
106 TOTC – Page 81
107 TOTC – page 83
108 TOTC – Page 81
109 David Sanford, in his book, If God Disappears: 9 Faith Wreckers and What to Do about Them; Tyndale, Wheaton. 2008. Page 15, writes - I haven’t always believed that. In fact, my father is an atheist. I was raised to not believe in God. When I became a Christian, my dad saw it as an act of rebellion. Later, I studied under a German existentialist philosopher. I dared her to
prove there isn’t a God. ‘If you’re right,’ I said, in essence, ‘I’ll stop being a Christian.’ Instead, after studying the writings of the most renowned atheists of the past four centuries, my Christian faith was stronger than ever.
Why is it, I wondered, that these men and women can write brilliantly about any area of philosophy, but they get so angry and irrational when writing about God, the church, and the Christian faith?
After studying their biographies, I discovered the most common reason: Very bad things happened
to them or their loved ones, often when they were very young. Many even went on to study in
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
53
One example is Jean Paul Sartre who was one of the most influential atheistic
philosophers of the last century. As a teenager his doubts and questions about the
rationality of faith caused him to reject God and religion. But shortly before his death,
Sartre relented. The Nouvel Observateur records these words: ‘I do not feel that I am
the product of chance, a speck of dust in the universe, but someone who was expected,
prepared, prefigured. In short, a being whom only a Creator could put here; and this
idea of a creating hand refers to God.’ 110
To Prepare unbelievers for the reception of supernatural enlightenment111
He wanted to challenge the intellectuals of his day, with reasons, to open their minds up
to the philosophical consistency of the Christian faith. In doing this there was the hope
that they might also have their hearts opened to the gospel.
Our Faith cannot be proved by natural principles and causes. But, the past and
present events of Church history do afford arguments in support of our religion
that are so convincing that no logical mind can reject them. At the same time, no
one believes that faith itself depends upon these arguments, seeing that it is ‘the
gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast’. (Ephes. 2:8-9)
To use human reasoning for such purposes does not detract from the value of
faith. The saying that faith proved by argument has no merit, refers only to the
faith of people who refuse to believe without proof. 112
He admits that grace is by revelation not reason, but he believed, like Gresham Machen
-
It is true that argument alone will not make a man a Christian. But because
argument is insufficient it does not follow that argument is unnecessary.113
Savonarola states
It could look like a waste of time to evaluate and analyse our Faith, when it is
based on the miraculous works of our Saviour Jesus Christ (which are obvious to
the whole world) and on the teaching of venerable theologians. Nevertheless,
there are men living today in such bondage to sin, that, even in the light of the
noonday sun, they grope in darkness, and scorn the marvels of heavenly science.
I am, therefore, on fire with zeal for the House of God114, and concerned for the
seminary, but they didn’t find the answers they were looking for. So they turned against God with a vengeance. It can happen to any of us.
110 This statement originally appeared in French in Nouvel Observateur. It first appeared in English in National Review, June 11, 1982
111 TOTC – Page 81
112 TOTC – Page 81
113 Gresham Machen, The Importance of Christian Scholarship in the Defence of the Gospel. A reprinted talk given in London in 1932 and reproduced in New Reformation
Magazine, September 1996
114 Psalm 69:9 - for zeal for your house consumes me, and the insults of those who insult you fall
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
54
salvation of these misguided men. I want to rouse them from their slumber and
bring to their memory, the things of Christ, which they have either forgotten or
driven from their hearts.115
To enable the faithful to refute the arguments of non-believers. 116
Savonarola identifies the need, not just to refute the arguments of non-believers, but to
enable the ordinary believer to do so. For him Apologetics was not just the domain of the
professional, but like St Peter, he saw the need for every believer to have a reason for
his or her hope in Christ. Sadly we have forgotten and lost this purpose.
But his aim also was to enable the believer to refute the arguments of non-believers.
This might appear a more ambitious aim, yet with some teaching it is possible to equip
people to expose the inconsistencies of secular arguments.
For example a dominant influence in European culture is Secular Humanism. It holds
sway in the media and in the academic world. Its Worldview and aims are set out in its
Manifestos117 1 and 2 and a revision in 2000.118 In 1933 Humanism saw itself as a new
religion - without God. Humanists believed that man could find the answer to everything,
create new morality, bring world peace, and issue in a utopia – because the idea of God
was being eliminated. But that belief is refuted because in practise none of these things
followed .
Manifesto 2 asserted that,
No deity will save us; man is mankind’s only hope.
Ethics are autonomous – each person decides what is right and wrong.
Human life has meaning because we are the ones who develop our futures.
Sexual expression has been repressed by intolerant religious sanctions but we
believe there should be a right to abortion, divorce and sexual activity between
consenting adults.
Their inconsistencies are exposed in that they are against rape and incest, but have no
ground for saying so, because they have no belief in „right and wrong’ believing each
person can choose their own actions and behaviour. Instead of bringing human life to
maturity, it has become a culture of death and disease.
d) To expose the irrationality of non-believers’ arguments so that simple
on me.
115 TOTC – Page 81
116 TOTC – Page 81
117 Paul Kurtz, editor, Humanist Manifestos I and II, Prometheus Books 1984
118 Paul Kurtz, editor, Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for New Planetary Humanism, Prometheus Books 2000
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
55
and uneducated people are released from the deception played
on them119
He believed that the Christian Faith is grounded in truth, therefore any philosophy or
argument which opposed the Faith must be false and open to being refuted. He realised
that this was something that required divine assistance from the God of truth.
Unfortunately, today such confidence in the truth has been lost and ground has been
yielded to atheistic arguments, which should have never been surrendered. Gresham
Machen laments this when he says,
There are some perils that should be avoided, in particular the peril of
acquainting ourselves of what is said against the Christian religion without ever
obtaining any really orderly acquaintance with what can be said for it. The
Christian religion flourishes not in the darkness but in the light. Intellectual
slothfulness is no remedy for unbelief. The true remedy is consecration of
intellectual powers to the service of our Lord Jesus Christ.120
11 His Apologetic Premises
His epistemology121 compared to 21st Century theories
How do we gain knowledge? How do we know what is true and truth? There is
induction, which is simply gathering the available evidence. Deduction is working with
the evidence so that conclusive results can be reached. (The Scriptures have many
examples of this). Empirical data is the information obtained through experience and
through the senses. Rationalism is reasoned belief based upon evidence. Revelation
involves a disclosure made by God either to all men through creation, or in special
revelation through Scripture and the witness of the Holy Spirit.
In the Scriptures there are examples of each of these ways of arriving at truth, and no
one way is put forward as the only legitimate method.
Savonarola‟s epistemology was based on experience plus reason. Following Aristotle, he
appealed to the Universe of Discourse, which is the logical process whereby ideas and
truth claims are matched against the evidence of the truth maker – the world or the
Universe. Truth is what corresponds to reality. If it is said that there is a tree in the
garden, the truth of the statement is either verified or denied by reality – either there is
a tree or there is not. Following this method a man could proceed by reason to discover
supernatural realities. With this conviction, Savonarola determined to provide an
apologetic which did not depend on „authorities‟, nor the Bible nor the Church – but on
reason. He believed that the Faith is reasonable and therefore can be presented in a
rational manner.
119 TOTC – Page 81
120 Gresham Machen, The Importance of Christian Scholarship in the Defence of the Gospel. A reprinted talk given in London in 1932 and reproduced in New Reformation Magazine, September 1996
121 Epistemology - a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
56
We will not appeal to any authority, no matter how learned they may be.
Instead, we shall proceed as if we had confidence in no one, and depend on
reason alone. By following such a method, we should satisfy everyone, apart from
the totally unreasonable.122
This knowledge can only be possible because God in his grace has granted free will to
men and placed them in a creation that reveals the creator.
Those who live in distant lands where Christianity is unknown have no
ground for excuse or complaint. Because all men are endowed with reason,
which leads to the knowledge of God, and God has also revealed123 himself
in the natural order of creation.124
This knowledge is not sufficient for salvation and fullness of faith. What is required is a
further act of grace as God‟s Spirit imparts light and insight and draws a person to
Christ. Those who seek to follow the light God gives in creation and conscience find God
will reveal the greater light through special revelation (as recorded in Scripture) –
through a preacher, a vision or dream, an angel, or through scripture.
If any one does use their reason and recognise that there must be a
creator, and turns to God for understanding, then Almighty God, the
Supreme Good, will not fail to reveal himself and His salvation. He will
enlighten him, either by inward inspiration, as He enlightened Job; or by
the ministry of angels, as He instructed Cornelius the Centurion125; or by
preaching, as He taught the Eunuch of Candace126 through the ministry of
Philip the Apostle.127
(This is supported in our day by reports of numbers of Muslims coming to faith after
having visions of Jesus speaking to them directly).
In appealing to reason alone he was meeting the humanists of his day, on their own
122 TOTC – Page 82
123 Romans 1:18-20 - The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known
about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the
world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
124 TOTC – Book 2 Ch 16
125 Acts 10:3-4 - One day at about three in the afternoon he had a vision. He distinctly saw an angel of God, who came to him and said, "Cornelius!" Cornelius stared at him in fear. "What is it, Lord?" he asked.
126 Acts 8:27-31 - (Philip) started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians. This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the book of Isaiah the prophet. The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it." Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. "Do you understand what you are reading?" Philip asked. "How can I," he said, "unless someone explains it to me?" So he invited Philip to
come up and sit with him.
127 TOTC – Page 132
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
57
ground. In the 15th Century, those who began to adopt the rationalism of the earlier
Greek philosophers were called Humanists. The university studies in these areas of arts
and philosophy became known as „humanities’. They celebrated knowledge that came
from human reason, and was not dependent on revelation from God. Those who wanted
to embrace Greek insights and maintain the place of revelation, were known as Christian
Humanists. Among them was Erasmus who provided the first reliable Greek text of the
New Testament. This renaissance of learning and the development of humanism is very
important as it still provides the basis for the philosophies and assumptions made by
societies in the 21st Century.
Many today define „knowledge’ or „proof„ as restricted to scientific investigation alone,
and that whatever „faith’ may be; It is not „scientific’. This attitude agrees with that of
philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), who said: ‘Whatever knowledge is attainable,
must be attained by scientific methods; and what science cannot discover, mankind
cannot know’.128 Such a position is obviously false, because it disregards the limitations
of scientific enquiry. It would make witness testimony useless and close off the study of
most of history and other of the humanities.
The attitude that only scientific proof is valid has lead to the assumption that one cannot
prove the existence of God and to claim to believe in such a God is irrational. However
in recent years the realm of science has been tarnished in the eyes of the popular media.
And the media is very ready to show up the faults and failures of the once trusted
scientific „saviours’. The scientific community itself has acknowledged this to be the case
in some of its recent conferences. They have been found to be fallible and responsible
for great harm in areas such as BSE, CJD, nuclear safety, and other medical
interventions including breast implants.
The media has seen behind the scientific research, and recognised the hand of big
business, so that today the motive, means and outcomes are viewed with suspicion. This
is evident in the discussion on GM crops.
Bill Joy, one of the original designers of the Unix operating system and founder and chief
scientist of the software maker Sun Micro Systems, made a sombre warning about the
risks from new scientific developments. He said, ‘The 21st century technologies –
genetics, nanotechnology and robotics are so powerful that they can spawn whole new
classes of accidents and abuses. Most dangerously, for the first time, these accidents
and abuses are widely within the reach of individuals or small groups. They will not
require large facilities or rare raw materials. Knowledge alone will enable the use of
them’. He concludes,’ The only realistic alternative I see is relinquishment: to limit
development of the technologies that are too dangerous by limiting our pursuit of certain
kinds of knowledge.’ 129
This has had a cultural impact to the point where certainties are thought to be a luxury
no longer in stock. Our post-modern age feels that there is only a truth that each
individual must make for himself or herself. However there is very little given from which
this truth may be constructed.
Historically Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) laid the foundation for this form of
128 Bertrand Russell, Religion and Science: new edition with Introduction by Michael Ruse, Oxford University Press, 1997, page 243
129 The Times, London, 15 March 2000
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
58
existentialism. He believed human reason has reached its limit. Therefore, one must take
a ‘leap of faith’ beyond all categories of knowledge and reason, and let go of rationalism,
to make a faith commitment. This led to the idea that faith has nothing to do with
reason and is not based on knowledge. This conclusion was then justified by saying that
if faith is based on knowledge or certainty – then it is not faith.
Principles of Advocacy. But there is a more pragmatic means of handling evidence to
reach valid conclusions. It is the sophisticated tool of advocacy found in the law courts.
It also finds expression in the way most people live their everyday lives – because it
works.
Many lawyers have come to faith by using their legal skills and principles of advocacy to
sift the evidence, and have found in the resurrection of Jesus, the proof they need. Many
major judges and Law Lords have come to faith in this way. Lord Atkin, Lord Denning,
Lord Diplock, Lord Mackay, and Lord Hailsham are just a few. In his biography, Lord
Hailsham tells of his coming to conversion through legal processes. The most helpful
Alpha course, which has brought many people to Christ, has been composed and
presented by Christian barristers – using principles of advocacy.
The principles of advocacy used to weigh evidence, begin with a presumption of
innocence – that the evidence is not deceitful. Witness evidence is valid but its value
depends upon the quality of the witness not on the quantity of witnesses. Hearsay and
subjective impressions do not form acceptable evidence. (When the media presents
someone to tell us whether the resurrection took place or not - be they bishop,
theologian or crank - they are easily dismissed by simply asking - 'Were you there?'
Their evidence would not be admissible in a criminal court because it is hearsay.) The
evidence is based on facts. A jury is told only to deal with the facts and not with their
preconceptions. This is a most helpful discipline - to put preconceptions to one side. The
evidence needs a standard of proof. In criminal law, the standard is high. It is not just
51% or even 75%, but beyond reasonable doubt. The standard of proof is probability;
not possibility.
The key thing to note is that absolute certainty is a luxury hardly ever available
- in any walk of life, or any situation. It is very important because so many people
considering the claims of Jesus are looking for absolute certainty - and yet such a
standard is unreasonable. All personal decisions are based on probability, and not
certainty. Probability is the basis on which you live your life day by day.
What bridges the gap between probability and certainty is faith. Faith is not based on
possibilities but on probability. For example there is no certain evidence available for
making a personal commitment to a marriage, no one knows what the future may hold
in any relationship. Yet on the basis of a friendship and a mutual attraction people will
make a commitment, feeling that the probability is strong enough for a good marriage.
When we ask any person to make a commitment to Jesus Christ we are not asking them
to do anything more or less than they do in other areas of their life, which is to weigh
the evidence and to act on the basis of probability.
The principles, developed in advocacy over the centuries, are very close to the Universe
of Discourse methodology used by Savonarola.
The complexity of religious language
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
59
How can we talk about God? Some say that God talk is equivocal, - words applied to God
and man have totally different meanings. Other say univocal, - words applied to God and
man have identical meanings. Yet others say analogical - words applied to God and man
have similar meanings. This formed a discussion among Christians and philosophers and
Aquinas said, ‘Words must be used in the same way, but applied only in a similar way.
All limitations must be removed from a term before applying it to God’ But then the
secular philosophers began to assert that all God talk is nonsense.
AJ Ayer (1910 – 1989) was a twentieth century English Philosopher who taught that all
talk of God is meaningless. He put forward his Verification Principle - which stated that
only what can be known and experienced through the five physical senses is sense or
reason. He used the word „sense’ to mean reason, as well as „the physical experience of
reality’. So he declared God, and all talk of God, as meaningless, because God cannot be
proved or known by the five senses. The problem with this assertion is that the
Verification Principle itself, cannot be tested or affirmed by the five senses because it is a
philosophical concept and not a physical reality. It is therefore self-refuting.
Ayer‟s followers also assert that talk of an infinite God must be meaningless because our
words are finite. It is true that we use the same words to describe God as we use to
describe the natural world. But in one instance we use them in a finite sense and in the
other we use them in an infinite sense. This does not mean that God talk is nonsense,
but it does often have the quality of analogy.
Christian Philosopher, Colin Brown points out -
When we talk about God, we can do no other than talk in limited analogies. For
God is not an object of time and space. On the other hand, there is a genuine
point of comparison. The truth of Christianity emerges in the act of living it
out.130
Savonarola deals with this issue concisely and clearly. He is confident in talking of God
because God himself has provided the allegories, he has spoken in words in Scripture
and he has spoken through his Son - the Logos.
An allegory requires, first, that the words should narrate, not a fiction, but some
fact that has really occurred. Secondly, that this fact should prefigure some future
event. Thirdly, that the fact narrated should have had real significance at the time
it took place, and also as a forecast of some future occurrence. As no one but
God can compose such allegories, and as the Holy Scriptures are full of them, it is
clear that only God can be their author. The language and style of the Bible are
matchless, and none of our most learned and eloquent doctors have ever been
able to imitate it. This is a clear proof that the Holy Scriptures are a divine
creation and not a human work. 131
Faith, Reason and Revelation
130 Brown, Colin, Philosophy And The Christian Faith, Tyndale Press, London 1969, page 48
131 TOTC - Page 110
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
60
How do we come to faith? Do we discover the truth of the gospel and the character of
God through reason or revelation? Is the human mind capable of discovering truth or has
it become so corrupted at the fall that it is helpless in any spiritual enquiry? These
questions are of prime importance because they affect the way we approach Apologetics,
and even lead some to reject Apologetics as an invalid enterprise.
There are Scriptures that seem to support different views concerning the relationship of
faith and reason. Some seem to suggest that faith is based on revelation alone, others
suggest reason alone, and others suggest reason and revelation together are essential.
Revelation Only. Some preachers today are convinced that there is no room for reason
in the journey of faith. If God revealed himself in nature it would have been distorted by
fallen man, and nature is itself fallen. R C Sproul points out that though the Catholic and
Reformed positions were divided on the place of reason in revelation, they were united in
dismissing outright humanism, and in recognizing the corruption of man through sin.
Nowhere do we find more clear evidence of the impact of secularism on Christian
thinking than in the sphere of anthropology. Christian anthropology rests not
merely on the biblical concept of creation, but on the biblical concept of the fall.
Virtually every Christian denomination historically has some doctrine of original
sin in its creeds and confessions. These confessional statements do not all agree
on the scope or extent of original sin, but they all repudiate everything that would
be compatible with humanism.132
Such people believe there is no natural revelation and therefore no use for theistic
proofs. A key advocate of this position was Kierkegaard, who said that man is incapable
of discovering divine truth because God is wholly „other‟. God can only be known through
a „leap of blind faith’ against reason. What we believe is more important than objective
truth. What is required is not an argument of reason, but an act of the will. The
resurrection need not be objectively true – what matters is that you believe it
subjectively.
Karl Barth was a great 20th century theologian who furthered the idea that God is „wholly
other‟ and cannot be known by reason – to try to know God by reason is futile.
Reformers like Luther and Calvin wanted to stress that revelation is an act of grace and
self-disclosure on God‟s part and not an optional path for those who found reasoning
wearisome. As Alvin Plantinga says –
Reformed or Calvinist theologians have for most part taken a dim view of this
enterprise. A few reformed thinkers, B. B Warfield, for example, endorse the
theistic proofs, but for the most part the reformed attitude has ranged from tepid
endorsement, through indifference, to suspicion, hostility, and outright
accusations of blasphemy. And this stance is initially puzzling. It looks a little
like the attitude some Christians adopt toward faith healing; it can't be done, and
132 Sproul, R.C., Willing To Believe, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1997. Page 20
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
61
even if it could, it shouldn't be.133
Cornelius Van Til (1895 – 1987) was a pre-suppositionalist apologist who believed that
there was no common ground for reasoning with non-Christians. To come to faith the
unbeliever had to pre-suppose the existence of God.
Reason Only. Few would be so bold as to say that we can discover God and come to
faith just by the power of reason. Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) taught that we cannot
find God by pure speculation, but by practical moral reasoning it becomes clear that we
have to live as if God exists. God is required to make sense of our moral duty in this
life. Reason tells us there must be a moral lawgiver for us to have the moral law.
Earlier René Descartes (1596-1650) had tried to establish rationalism as the foundation
of all knowledge and that by reasoning one could establish the existence of God and
come to some measure of faith. Today those who wish to establish reason as the only
valid route to knowledge, are more likely to focus their arguments on destroying faith
and proving that belief in God and miracles is irrational.
Reason over Revelation. An early approach saw reason as over revelation. The
Alexandrian Fathers of the early Church (including Clement of Alexandria and Justin
Martyr) gave high regard to the Greek philosophers and their theories of knowledge.
They, and also modern higher critics, taught that reason sits in authority over the Bible,
because human reason is needed to evaluate the truth of the Bible. This approach is still
dominant today and has links to deism, which teaches that God created the world and
now stands back from creation and does not interact nor intervene.
Revelation over Reason. Tertullian (ca.160 – ca. 220 AD) rejected the supremacy of
reason, but argued that reason is required to respond to revelation, but not replace
revelation. His distrust of speculative reasoning is seen in his assertion that philosophers
are the fathers of all heresies and asked, „What indeed has Athens to do with
Jerusalem?’
Luther134 and Calvin saw revelation from God as the source of knowledge and the final
revelation to be in Jesus Christ and in his written word, the Bible. It was the ultimate
authority – not the Pope, nor philosophical reasonings.
Revelation and Reason. Augustine taught both reason and revelation were exercised
together, because each has its place. He said that ‘faith is understanding’s step and
understanding is faith’s reward’. One cannot believe in something without some
understanding of the ‘something’ in which trust is placed. We can prove God from reason
but sin blinds us to the fullness of truth, so faith needs revelation. We should reason to
133 James Sennett, editor, The Analytic Theist - An Alvin Plantinga Reader, Eerdmans Publishing, Cambridge, 1998, Page 139
134 Luther’s last sermon at Wittenburg has gone down in history as a classic invective against
reason, ‘the Devil’s whore’. Brown, Colin, Christianity And Western Thought, Volume One, Inter Varsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois, 1990. Page 148
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
62
the Bible as God‟s revelation and then submit to that revelation.
Thomas Aquinas stressed the place of reason, even more than Augustine, though he was
an empiricist. He taught that God can be known from natural reason and that sin did not
completely destroy the ability to reason. In his Summa Theologiae he said, ‘The truth of
the Christian faith...surpasses the capacity of reason, nevertheless that truth that the
human reason is naturally endowed to know cannot be opposed to the truth of the
Christian faith.’ On this foundation he built his five ways to establish the existence of
God. He explained that some truths such at the doctrine of the Trinity could only be
proven by revelation. Aquinas also clarified the difference between belief in and belief
that. A Man can believe that God exists without believing in him.
We have to reason to understand and discover revelation so reason is prior. But all truth
comes from God who is prior to both in terms of human experience. We need reason
and revelation. No faith should be unreasonable – though reason should not a priori
reject revelation.
Savonarola’s response to these questions is again clear and perceptive. He answers
the question by going back to note the approach of Christ.
By rational science, we refer to logic, rhetoric and poetry; which aim to
teach us how to weave arguments together and through reasoning, bring
men to accept our ideas. Now, Christ instructed the Apostles in rational
science to such good effect that by their preaching they exercised more
influence in the world, than had previously been achieved by any human
power or learning.
True science is either practical and affects our life, or just speculation.
What Christ has taught is very practical and relates to our lives so
completely that Christians need no philosophy but His. Speculative science
may consider divine things, but it will never reach the breadth and certainty
as found in the teaching of Christ. Christ, the teacher, is above all human
wisdom, and beyond the wisdom of any heathen deities. Indeed, He is the very
Wisdom135 of the Eternal God.136
He also notes the place of special revelation -
Christians are established in their faith through the special revelation of God;
otherwise, their faith would not be a matter of trust, but opinion. But such
evidences confirm us in our Faith, and prove to our adversaries that our believing
is not mindless, but thoughtful and with intellectual rigour. 137
And he follows Aquinas in differentiating natural revelation and special revelation.
As it is possible to gain knowledge of invisible things by means of visible things,
we should understand, that there are also some aspects of the nature of God
135 1 Cor. 1:24 - Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
136 TOTC – Pages 127-128
137 TOTC – Page 83
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
63
which we can know through human reason, and through natural things. Such
aspects are, the existence of God, His unity, His simplicity of being, and similar
truths, which philosophers have come to recognise. But there are other aspects of
God’s nature, which we cannot discover through human reason. - there are
secrets, which no created intellect can investigate. The divine things, which our
natural reason is not competent to discover by itself, are those that we believe by
faith. These include, the trinity and unity of God, the divinity and humanity of our
Saviour Jesus Christ, and other similar truths.
As natural revelation precedes the revelation of grace, we will begin with those
aspects of God, which we are competent to investigate by means of natural
evidence and deduction.138
His emphasis is not on man‟s capacity, but on God‟s generosity. He notes that all that we
have; the exercise of faith and the faculty of reason, are all gifts from God. 139 Anything
that man does is an exercising of the gifts God has given to him. And that when God
reveals himself to a man, that man needs to exercise reason to be able to understand
and respond to the ideas and context which God uses to communicate his love.
Our Faith cannot be proved by natural principles and causes. But, the past and
present events of Church history do afford arguments in support of our religion
that are so convincing that no logical mind can reject them. At the same time, no
one believes that faith itself depends upon these arguments, seeing that it is ‘the
gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast’. (Ephes. 2:8-9) 140
Savonarola was very clear of the fact that God has chosen to reveal himself to those who
are not sophisticated.
1 Cor. 3:19-20 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is
written: ‘He catches the wise in their craftiness’; and again, ‘The Lord knows that
the thoughts of the wise are futile.’
1 Cor. 1:20-21 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the
philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For
since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God
was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who
believe
There is a tendency to see God as confined to a person‟s human capacity for reasoning,
when he wants to make himself known. This is not the case. Corrie Ten Boom wrote a
lovely booklet called, „Common sense not needed‟141 in which she shared her experience
of working with brain damaged youngsters and finding real faith in them. I too have
spent years working with people of all ages with very severe learning difficulties and
138 TOTC – Page 89
139 Job 38:36 Who endowed the heart with wisdom or gave understanding to the mind?
140 TOTC – Page 81
141 Corrie Ten Boom, Common sense not needed, Christian Literature Crusade, London, 2003
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
64
have found in them a real sensitivity to the presence of God.
His emphasis on God‟s grace includes recognition of the fact that there is a veil over the
minds of those who read the Scriptures, until they come to Christ.
2 Cor. 3:13-16 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep
the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. But their
minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old
covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken
away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But
whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
God’s Sovereignty, Free will and Molinism
Is Man free? Do we make free choices? Are we free to choose to follow Christ
and put our trust in Him? Do we have free will, and what is will? The will is
usually considered as one of two corresponding activities of the mind. It is the ability to
make choices and decisions based on the other activity; reason, which involves
evaluation of information and argument. Free will is the ability to make an informed and
rational choice without undue compulsion.
Burrhus Frederic Skinner (1904 – 1990) was a behavioural psychologist142 who taught
that there was no free will but man is controlled by genetics and environment. Our
actions affect what happens, but they are predetermined. On this basis he built a
therapy involving behavioural modification. In denying free will he also denied personal
accountability – which means that the theory does not work in the real world as it says a
criminal cannot be held guilty. He had an unchristian approach, but Christians can be
just as rigid in their view of free will.
Hyper Calvinism says God pre determines every event and man is not free. Robert
Charles Sproul, (b.1939) holds this position.
The antithesis to divine sovereignty is not human freedom, but human autonomy.
Autonomy represents a degree of freedom that is unlimited by any higher
authority or power. If God is sovereign, then man cannot be autonomous.
Conversely if man is autonomous, then God cannot be sovereign. 143
The problem here is the same as with Skinner - if man is not free, then he cannot be
held accountable and culpable. In Let Me See Thy Glory: A Study of the Attributes of
God,144 Robert Deffinbaugh pictures a God who can do whatever he chooses and choose
142 B. F. Skinner, Beyond freedom and dignity, Vintage Book, New York, 1972
143 Sproul, R.C., Willing To Believe, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1997. Page 27
144 Robert Deffinbaugh, Let Me See Thy Glory: A Study of the Attributes of God, Biblical
Studies Press, 2002
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
65
whatever he pleases (that is consistent with his holy character) – except, give free will
to his Children. This is to deny to God, something that even I have in my relationship
with my children. When they were young, I had power and sovereignty over them – but
to develop their character and to help them grow to maturity I granted them areas and
issues where they could choose. I freely chose to do this. And I also had to relate to
them in such ways as would allow them freedom to choose to love and trust me. I could
not coerce it.
Deffinbaugh ends up describing God as acting in ways that are inconsistent with his
character. He says that God chooses who will be saved and who will be cast into outer
darkness for eternity. He says God does this because he is free to choose – and there is
nothing worthy or distinguishing in humanity that is the basis for this choice. Nor is there
anything in the nature of God to determine the choice because God is impartial and just
in all his dealings. This leaves us with the only logical option that Deffinbaugh‟s God is
capricious and uncaring in the most profound matter of election and salvation. Such a
conclusion robs God of his love, justice, grace and wisdom.
Hyper Arminianism says God pre determined who should be saved, because he
foreknew what each man would freely choose to do. This view implies that man makes
all the decisions and the ultimate destiny of each individual and society would be a
decision made first by man and then ratified by God.
Open Theism is a further development of Hyper Arminianism. It challenges the
knowledge and character of God and suggests that he is open in his actions and only
motivated by love. God is omniscient in the sense that He knows all that is knowable,
but not even God can know the future. He can take incredibly wise guesses but He can
be fooled, can make wrong choices, can give false guidance, can be mistaken, and can
be resisted to the point of frustration. Because this is the only way that humans can be
truly free moral creatures. He has long term plans for the future but he has little idea of
how things will work out in the short term because he wants to leave himself free to
respond in love to whatever society or individuals will decide.
Genuine human freedom and the omniscience of God can be reconciled … only
when we acknowledge that there are some things that even an omniscient God
cannot know. 145
It reconstructs the events leading up to and surrounding Christ's death to portray both
Father and Son deciding only at the last minute that Jesus had to die.
Although Scripture attests that the incarnation was planned from the creation of
the world, this is not so with the cross. The path of the cross comes about only
through God's interaction with humans in history. Not until the agonizing prayer
in Gethsemane do ‘Father and Son both come to understand that there is no
other way.’ Even after this new discovery comes to God, the question still hangs
145 P.K. Helseth, "On Divine Ambivalence", Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 44.3, September 2001, page 494
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
66
over Jesus, ‘Will this gambit work?’ 146
Divine Mystery View
Norman Geisler (b.1932) and James I Packer (b.1926), hold the view that God
predetermines and man is free – but how is a mystery which will not be revealed in this
life. This is an intellectually consistent and humble attitude to adopt.
Geisler and Feinberg say
Human knowledge is probable and fallible in part because our knowledge is
partial. Sometimes we are wrong simply because we are ignorant of some
relevant fact or facts. Such cannot be the case with God because God knows
everything, both the actual and the possible (Ps. 139:1-6). Moreover, God's
knowledge is true. That is, it corresponds to reality.147
If there were greater humility, we might recognise that the revelation that God has given
has been provided to draw us into relationship. This purpose is fulfilled when we come
into a saving relationship with Christ and trust allows us to take the blessings of his
revelation, living with the mysteries, without forcing them to their logical conclusions.
As J. I. Packer says,
The root cause is the passion for systematic consistency, and a reluctance to
recognise the existence of mystery and to let God be wiser than men, and the
consequent subjecting of Scripture to the supposed demands of human logic.
People see that the Bible teaches man's responsibility for his actions; they do not
see (a man, indeed, cannot see) how this is consistent with the sovereign
lordship of God over those actions. They are not content to let the two truths live
side by side, as they do in the Scriptures, but to jump to the conclusion that, in
order to uphold the biblical truth of human responsibility, they are bound to reject
the equally biblical and equally true doctrine of Divine sovereignty, and to explain
away the great number of texts that teach it. The desire to over simplify the
Bible by cutting out the mysteries is natural to our perverse minds, and it is not
surprising that even good men should fall victim to it. Hence this persistent and
troublesome dispute. The irony of the situation, however, is that when we ask
how the two sides pray, it becomes apparent that those who profess to deny
God's sovereignty really believe in it just a strongly as those who affirm it.
How then do you pray? Do you ask God for your daily bread? Do you thank God
for your conversion? Do you pray for the conversion of others? If the answer is
'no', I can only say that I do not think you are yet born again. If the answer is
'yes' - well, that proves that, whatever side you may have taken in debates on
this question in the past, in your heart you believe in the sovereignty of God no
less firmly than anyone else. On our feet we may have arguments about it, but
146 John Sanders, The God Who Risks, a Theology of Providence, Inter Varsity Press, Downers
Grove, 1998. Pages 100 -101
147 Geisler and Feinberg, Introduction to Philosophy, Baker Books 2005, pages 129-130
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
67
on our knees all are agreed. 148
Medieval Soteriology.
A great deal of dispute centred around the issue of regeneration. Could a man choose to
repent and God respond in the grace of regeneration. Or as Luther taught, following
Augustine, man‟s will is in bondage and so regeneration is a free act of grace on the part
of God. Calvin spelled out the Christian doctrine of Predestination, more completely,
according to which a person's ultimate destiny, whether it be salvation or damnation, is
determined by God alone prior to, and apart from, any worth or merit on the person's
part. Some claimed that God only determines those to be saved; while others said that
he also determines those to be condemned. The latter teaching is called double
predestination.
The debate turned upon those who wanted to apply logic to the concept of God‟s
sovereignty, and those who wanted to be affirming of Man‟s moral responsibility. Yet
almost all agreed that salvation was through faith in Jesus Christ and his sacrificial
death. (There were some varied ideas as to how this salvation should be appropriated –
Augustine asserting that it was through baptism. „It must be noted that … in Augustine,
the grace of regeneration is effected by the settlement of baptism.)149
One way of applying deductive logic to the issue, was to debate the time line or order of
Salvation. Who does what and in what order – R C Sproul explains -
The classic issue between Augustinian theology and all forms of semi Pelagianism
focuses on one aspect of the order of salvation (ordo Salutis). What is the
relationship between regeneration and faith? Is regeneration a monegistic or
synergistic work? Must a person first exercise faith in order to be born again? Or
must rebirth occur before a person is able to exercise faith? Monoergistic
regeneration means that regeneration is accomplished by a single actor, God. It
means literally a ‘one working.’ Synergism, on the other hand, refers to work
that involves the action of two or more parties. The reformers taught not only
that regeneration does proceed faith but also that it must proceed faith. Faith is
regeneration's fruit, not its cause.150
For Luther the ‘irresistibility’ of grace is what makes it so gracious. Irresistible
grace denies the converted sinner any basis for boasting.151
Savonarola’s gospel and doctrine of free will.
148 James Packer, Evangelism And The Sovereignty Of God, Inter Varsity Fellowship, London, 1966, page 16
149 Sproul, R.C., Willing To Believe, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1997. Page 76
150 Sproul, R.C., Willing To Believe, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1997. Page 23
151 Sproul, R.C., Willing To Believe, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1997. Page 122
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
68
In the midst of a debate, which has divided and driven Christians to extremes of opinion,
Savonarola continues to speak with balance, insight and clarity.
First he establishes the reason why we need to be saved. It is because of original sin.
Man was created for fellowship with God, who is righteous and holy. Man had a
„righteousness‟ that was freely given to him, but was lost by an act of Adam‟s
disobedience.
Hence, we say that man was, at his creation, endowed with original
righteousness, with no sense of guilt or fear, and with the body and its five
senses subject to the soul. We further hold that if Adam had not deliberately
disobeyed God, this original righteousness would have been passed to all his
descendents.
But it is most reasonable, that, if man wilfully chose to turn away from God, he
should be deprived of original righteousness, and of the natural subjection of his
senses to reason, and of the immortality of his body. This was the just
punishment for his sin. This loss of original righteousness, which Adam incurred,
and which was transmitted by him to the whole human race, is what we mean by
original sin.152
The consequences of this sin are loss of fellowship with God, a corrupting of our human
nature and a coming judgment. There is a penalty. But God who is rich in mercy and
compassion has made provision for us. He has provided salvation as an act of pure
grace. Christ took the penalty and achieved our salvation by his death on the cross. Only
he could make a perfect sacrifice by laying down his holy life. His salvation includes the
promise of eternal life.
The following quotations are all from TOTC Book 3 Ch 10.
Man owed a debt for sin and God, becoming a man, was the only one with the
power to pay that debt, for the whole human race. In this fact is revealed the
appropriateness of His Incarnation, in which He has united the divine to the
human nature. In this mystery we recognise His power, His wisdom, and His
goodness as He has wholly given Himself to the human race, to embrace it, and
draw it to His love. But, above all His other attributes, His mercy is shown;
because it has led Him to be crucified out of love for us. His justice also is seen in
that He has Himself made satisfaction for original sin.
Therefore His mercy should create a secure hope in sinners who repent and His
justice should cause those who do not repent, to tremble. This is the reason why,
since Christ came into the world, so many men have been drawn from sin to
holiness of life.
When we consider these mercies, and the innumerable blessings Christ has
brought to humanity, we discover depths of wisdom that are unfathomable by the
intellect of man. (It is because this wisdom cannot be fathomed that it is
regarded as foolish by the world.) We also see how only Christ was eligible to
suffer for the guilt of mankind.
152 TOTC – Page 147.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
69
He came, not just to suffer for man, but also to be an example of righteous living.
So he chose a most bitter and disgraceful death to teach us that neither shame,
nor suffering, should force us to abandon the cause of truth and righteousness.
There is not enough time for me to enlarge upon the other reasons for our
Saviour choosing His terrible manner of death. I will only add, that those that
love Him, find His cross has been a source of sweetness and of light. Only those
who have experienced it will understand what I mean by this.
Christ died to atone for our sins, and especially for original sin, which was the
cause of the patriarchs being detained in Limbo. Therefore, it was right that
Christ should, immediately after His death (having bought their release from sin),
descend to Limbo and announce their freedom. 153
And it was also right that He should remain for three days in the tomb. Had He
stayed there longer, men would have lost all hope of His resurrection; and had He
not remained in the tomb so long, they would have denied the reality of His
death.
Man is free to respond to Christ‟s offer of salvation. This response is made with the help
of God who brings his enlightenment to us, draws us to himself and gives to us the gift
of faith.
This condition for salvation is a most reasonable one; for our ultimate
intimacy with God is to consist in the vision and knowledge of God, which
no one can attain, except by the supernatural gift of faith. St. Paul says
that without faith, ‘it is impossible to please God’ (Hebrews 11:6) 154
Faith is the gift of God, given to every believer for his salvation; therefore, my
children, do not share the errors of those who say to you, ‘If I saw some miracle,
or some man raised from the dead, then would I believe.’ Those men are
deceived, for faith comes not of our own strength, but is a supernatural gift - that
is, a light shed from above into the mind of man. And he who would receive this
light must prepare his inner man and abase himself before God.155
The Scripture teaches that one of the chief sources is faith in Christ and his love
for us. ‘This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all
who believe.’ Romans 3:22 ‘Without faith it is impossible to please God’ Hebrews
11:6 By faith expressed by love, we mean that in loving Christ crucified above all
things, we believe He is truly God and truly man, one with the Father and the
Holy Spirit, but a distinct person.156
Man has free will and so is accountable for accepting or rejecting Christ‟s offer of
153 1 Peter 3:18–19 - For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison. The word prison (Greek – phulake) is a figurative word indicating a cage or holding place.
154 TOTC – Page 132
155 Villari - Book 1 Ch 10.
156 TOTC – Page 107
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
70
salvation.
If any one ask why the will is free, we reply unto them, Because it is will.
Those who will be saved are known to God and elected in the purposes of God.
But perhaps, you would then ask, ‘Why are some chosen and others cast out?’
Matters of faith, my son, must be studied by the light of faith, in the manner
prescribed to you by the Scriptures; further than this you may not go, lest you
should stumble. Who you are to answer back to God? Has not the potter power
over the clay, to knead from the same lump vessels of honour or vessels for base
uses? God shows mercy to the elect, justice to the wicked. But should you ask
why God has predestined this man rather than that, why John is chosen rather
than Peter? Then I shall tell you that such is the will of God, nor can any other
answer be given. The Pelagians declared it depended on our good deeds in this
life; for, according to those heretics, the principle of well-doing is in ourselves,
while its consummation and perfection comes from God. They sought to pass the
bounds assigned to us, and fell into heresy.
The Scriptures are very plain: they tell us, not in one place, but in many, that not
only the end of well-doing, but also its beginning, comes to us from God; even as
in all our good works it is God who works through us. ‘It is therefore untrue that
the grace of God is obtained by pre-existing works and merits, that through them
we are predestined to everlasting life, as though works and merits were the cause
of predestination. It is all the contrary, for works and merit are the effect of
predestination, and the Divine will the cause of predestination, as we have before
said.
We do not receive grace by partaking of sacraments.
In the same way, the sacraments are not the source of grace. Grace does not
come from either the sacrament’s own innate virtue, nor by power acquired from
the actions of Christ. Grace comes from God alone.157
There is no salvation apart from faith in Christ
From what has just been said, it is evident, that Christianity is the only true
religion. And if this is the case, then there is no salvation except through faith in
Christ, and all, except Christians, must be living in error.158
The motivation behind salvation is the love of God.
Tell me, O Peter, tell me, O Magdalen, why are you in Paradise? You sinned even
as we sin. You, Peter, who had witnessed the Son of God, had conversed with
Him, heard Him preach, beheld His miracles, and, alone, with two other disciples,
had beheld His transfiguration on Mount Tabor, hearkened unto His paternal
157 TOTC – Page 157
158 TOTC – Page 168
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
71
voice, and who, despite all this, at the word of a base woman did deny Him
thrice, yet you were restored to grace, and made the head of the Church, and do
now enjoy heavenly bliss; how have you gained these blessings? Do not say that
by your own merits you have attained salvation, but by the goodness of God, who
did bestow so many blessings on you, and vouchsafed to you in this life so much
light and grace. And you, Magdalen, later, you were so favoured by the Saviour
as to be the first to behold Him risen from the dead, and were made an apostle
unto the Apostles. This grace, these gifts, were not given to you because you
deserved them, O Mary! but because God loved you and willed your salvation.159
Savonarola taught that in our freedom of will we should choose to live in ways pleasing
to the Lord, as that would be the best way to be receptive to the working of the Holy
Spirit. Not only is it in our power, but it is also our duty, to prepare ourselves for the
reception of this gift of faith and grace, which is never withheld from those who do their
utmost to obtain it. According to him, there are three things required to prepare and
dispose us for its reception, - determined belief, prayer, and good works.
Such ideas are controversial for those who would want to say that he and the Church of
his day taught that good works attract the mercy of God and are our part in preparing
for our salvation. Careful reading of his teaching shows that he did not believe such a
notion but he did believe that „faith without works is dead‟160, as the Apostle James says.
He also thought that it was more fitting for a person to be like Lydia than Saul of Tarsus
in the period before conversion. In Acts we read of both of them. One gave time to
prayer and worship161 while the other was breathing out threats and violence against
God‟s people.162
Providence works with men in such a way, as to leave them the freedom of their
will. As they do co-operate with the impulse of providence, they will be acting
appropriately to attain to their desired end.163
The other controversy that has been present in the Church for thousands of years
concerns free will. Can a man resist God if he is predestined to salvation? Can a man
choose to follow Christ, or is the will bound and only able to respond when God creates
the response?
Savonarola believed that if man did not have free will he would be like an animal living
by instinct. If this were the case he would not be in the image of God, because God has
free will.
Another argument for the immortality of the soul lies in the fact that man, like
other animals, has the power of autonomous action. Now, as the other animals
159 TOTC – Book 4 Ch 1. Latin Edition, translated by Travers Hill
160 James 2:26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
161 Acts 16:14 One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshipper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message.
162 Acts 9:1 Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's
disciples.
163 TOTC – Page 95
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
72
move by means of instinct and mind, so it follows that it must also be his
intelligent mind, which enables man to move. We know that man is governed by
will and understanding. The essence of man, therefore, must be an intelligent
soul, capable of volition.164
Molinism
Savonarola developed a concept of the way God draws us to himself through his
providence and how he is able to respond to our free choices. Luis de Molina, a Spanish
Jesuit priest, would take these ideas up fifty years later and they would become what is
now known as Molinism. As noted, it is a theory promoted today by William Lane Craig
and Alvin Carl Plantinga.
This theory says God knows what man would freely choose in every possible world, and
predetermines our choices by controlling our circumstances, and man freely chooses his
actions. This allows God to speak to us and make the gospel meaningful to us so that we
are free to receive it, or reject it. This fits with the word of Jesus - John 6:44 ‘No-one
can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him’. Also with the words of St
Paul, as he describes how God uses circumstances. Romans 8:28 And we know that in all
things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to
his purpose.
Savonarola pre-dated Molina as he described the grace of God working with man, in
providence. For him providence was the explanation.
We must remember that God moves the will of man in two ways. Sometimes by
showing him something good, in order to arouse a love for it within him.
Sometimes by applying His power to the will of man, in order to influence him to
an act of love or of desire. This is just like a shepherd who may attract a sheep
by showing it food; or he may use his hand to draw it along.
Now, people can influence each other in the first of these two ways, but no man
can act on the will of another in the second way. Because the will comes directly
from God, it is directly subject to Him, and He alone can move it to will, or not to
will. Even though the will is completely in God's power, He never acts upon it in
such a way as to deprive man of his liberty. He always leaves him his free-will,
because God works with all things according to their nature and ability. 165
All things, both natural and artificial, are ordered for this purpose. Providence
moves all men toward this end as we seek to conform to the moral virtues.
However, providence works with men in such a way, as to leave them the
freedom of their will. As they do co-operate with the impulse of providence, they
will be acting appropriately to attain to their desired end.166
164 TOTC – Page 99
165 TOTC – Page 178
166 TOTC – Page 95
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
73
If it never is the will of the Father that anyone should perish167, and that he actively
works providentially in the life of each person, then it would require a free but arrogant
choice to resist God‟s grace. This is sometimes described as becoming gospel „hardened‟.
We should note that the hardening of someone‟s heart and mind is attributed to God, but
is caused by an act of grace on his part, being met by a resistant and evil response.
Savonarola explains that the same grace produces opposite results.
We must now investigate the cause of this phenomenon. Philosophy recognises
that contrary effects can spring from the same cause, because of the different
nature of the matter affected. For example, we see how the rays of the sun
harden the earth, and melt ice, cause a well-planted tree to bear flower and fruit,
and wither another whose roots are not deeply grounded. 168
Faith does not depend upon Apologetic proofs, nor is it created by such
Proofs
Faith should be the volitional commitment of an informed intellect. But again, Christians
have pushed to extreme positions in arguing about what is involved. Some teach that the
gospel evidence is so strong that the faith we exercise is an acceptance of truth and
commitment to Christ. Others make the assumption that God is most pleased when we
have simple faith and believe things that appear impossible and then if we believe hard
enough – as a reward for such faith – God makes the impossible real. This applies in the
matter of salvation, but also in the area of healing. When healing has not come it has led
to both disappointment with God for not keeping his word and also guilt on the part of
the believer for not having believed hard enough.
In reality we cannot come to know God on the basis of arguments alone and there is an
element of commitment that is needed to experience ourselves being drawn to Christ, by
the Father. Colin Brown and James Boice make this clear in their observations
Jesus did not hand out his message on the plate. To find out its truths demands
a personal commitment. It is to those who follow him that he gives
understanding. It is through following him that men encounter the Father.
Objective proof seems to have been ruled out. God's existence is not a matter of
logical or scientific demonstration but of inner awareness. The central truths of
the Christian Gospel are reached only by personal commitment.169
Nicodemas came to see a young rabbi, Jesus of Nazareth. With the exception of
the word 'rabbi', which was merely a polite form of address, the first words were
a claim to considerable knowledge. Nicodemas said, ‘we know.’ then he began
to rehearse things he knew of , or thought he knew, and with which he wanted to
begin the discussion 1. That Jesus was continuing to do many miracles; 2. That
these miracles were intended to authenticate him as a teacher sent from God;
and that therefore, 3. Jesus was one to whom he should listen. Unfortunately for
167 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
168 TOTC – Page 114
169 Brown, Colin, Philosophy And The Christian Faith, Tyndale Press, London 1969, page 47
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
74
Nicodemas, Jesus replied that such an approach to knowledge was wrong and
that Nicodemas could therefore know nothing until he had first experienced an
inward, spiritual transformation. ‘You must be born anew,’ Jesus told him. John
chapter 3:7 170
Savonarola is clear that faith is a gift of grace. If everything were by reason and proof
then all would be self-evident and there would be no need for faith.
At the same time, no one believes that faith itself depends upon these
arguments, seeing that it is ‘the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can
boast’. (Ephes. 2:8-9)171
But as noted earlier, he sees the Scriptural imperative to engage in Apologetics and the
purpose of Apologetics, mean that reasoning and defending the Gospel truths is vital. For
him fideism, would never have been an option. The central message of his preaching
was the need to respond to the gospel of Christ.
If only I might persuade you to turn away from earthly things, and follow the
things eternal! May God grant this grace to me and to you. But this is a gift from
God. ‘None may come unto me’, says the Lord, ‘unless the Father brings him’. I
cannot give you that inward illumination, I can only sound in your ears; but what
use is that if your intellect is not enlightened, nor your heart warmed? And how
may this be done, save by the word of God? Labour, then, to comprehend His
word, and I will strive to do the work of the Apostles, making the Holy Scriptures
known to you; and your part is to be doers, and not only hearers of the word of
God. 172
His gospel imperative and Fideism
Fideism is the theory that one must simply believe and you cannot use reason to
discover that God exists. Not only is there no evidence or argument that can create faith
– it is the very opposite of faith to look for evidence. Fideism predates, but was taught
by Kierkegaard. It holds that objective truth and faith do not meet. What you feel
subjectively as truth – is truth. Those who hold this do not defend the Faith – because
faith is a leap in the dark.
Savonarola would counter all this by his insistence that we are commanded to use
reason in our relationship with God. We are called to honour him by using the God given
faculty of our mind.
Isaiah 1:18 ‘Come now, let us reason together,’ says the LORD.
Matthew 22:37 Jesus replied: ‘ 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and
with all your soul and with all your mind.'
170 James Montgomery Boice, Foundations Of The Christian Faith, Inter Varsity Press, Leicester, 1981, page 19
171 TOTC – Page 81
172 Villari – Book 1 Ch 8
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
75
To engage in the Apologetic Task has Apostolic authority and
commission.
Savonarola quotes Scripture to establish that engaging in Apologetics is commended and
commanded by Apostolic authority. He quotes 1 Peter 3:15
There are those who are enlightened by God, and have embraced the Faith,
without proofs. They then go on to strengthen their own belief and that of
others, by investigating the grounds of their faith. These deserve praise because
they obey the instruction of St. Peter ‘in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord.
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the
reason for the hope that you have’.173
In this text, St Peter calls upon all Christians to be ready to give an answer, Greek term
apologia, which implies informal conversation as well as a formal testimony in a court.
The answer is to be an exposition of our reason, which is the Greek word logos which
implies a thought out rational explanation. The Apostle expects every Christian to have
some ability in this activity and not for the task to be confined to a group of experts.
This same Apostolic instruction is given by St Paul
Col. 4:5-6 Be wise in the way you act towards outsiders; make the most of every
opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so
that you may know how to answer everyone.
Reason alone will be the authority appealed to – not Church, Pope or
Bible.
In Savonarola‟s day, as in our own time, there was a strong tendency to appeal to
human authorities. This technique has been used by Christians, but particularly by the
renaissance philosophers. The method was to quote some scholar or celebrity and to
suggest that it would be sensible to line one‟s thinking and behaviour with theirs. This is
more than regarding someone as an example – it is submitting one's own judgement to
another person‟s greater authority. The authority could be a person or institute of great
learning or it could be a religious or political power to which one owes obedience.
Savonarola resists such authorities and challenges his readers to exercise their own
judgment. As part of this compact with the reader, he is prepared to argue his
Apologetic without appeal to authorities that could be disputed or thought unconvincing.
As noted earlier, he believed that the Faith is reasonable and therefore can be presented
in a rational manner.
In this book we intend to be guided by reason alone. We will not appeal to any
authority, no matter how learned they may be. Instead, we shall proceed as if we
had confidence in no one, and depend on reason alone. By following such a
173 TOTC – Page 81
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
76
method, we should satisfy everyone, apart from the totally unreasonable.174
The argument will be in the language and thought of the hearers.
The language and terms used are familiar to the readers and will enable effective
communication, even with the least educated. He said he would -
Expose the irrationality of non-believers’ arguments so that simple and
uneducated people are released from the deception played on them. 175
The argument will begin with some agreed basic suppositions.
If an argument is to be conducted satisfactorily, the disputants must agree with
each other about some point. Because, if they disagree on every point, there will
be no possibility of discussion. They may, or may not, of course, think alike on
matters of minor importance. But they must agree about certain principles, which
are so generally accepted that no one denies them. We must, therefore, take up
our position on certain acknowledged principles. We cannot argue with one who
denies them; because he who refuses to accept these first principles is unreason-
able. 176
12 His Apologetic deals with the loss of nerve in current Apologetics, by
providing the clearest understanding of the Apologetic task, the
reasons for undertaking that task, the method of approaching that
task and the place of that task within the grace of God.
In the western world of the 19th Century, there was a great emphasis on reason as the
key to all areas of life. The idealism of philosophers like Georg Hegel (1770 – 1831) and
the belief in progress became dominant ideas. This was the beginning of the American
Dream; that the lower orders can progress to wealth and power. This mood fitted well
with Charles Darwin's (1809 – 1882) „Origins of the Species‟ published in 1859. Darwin
saw man as resulting from an evolved progress based on the survival of the fittest. With
this came belief in the goodness and progress of the individual. Andrew Carnegie
captured the mood -
To kill a man will be considered as disgusting as we in this day consider it
disgusting to eat one.177
174 TOTC – Page 81
175 TOTC – Page 81
176 TOTC – Page 83
177 Andrew Carnegie, 1900, Leadership, Vol. 5, no. 1.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
77
Protestant Theology tried to echo the spirit of the day. The Bible was seen as complex
and textually unreliable. If there was a God then he was often seen in deistic terms and
creation was attributed to evolution. Miracles were dismissed as irrational. Liberalism, or
Modernism, as a major theology, proclaimed that humanity was evolving and Jesus was
to be seen as the ideal man. He modelled for us what we can attain if we imitate his
morality. Sin was seen as primitive and we should have grown out of that kind of
superstition. The gospel became a social gospel, with the aim of cleaning up society. It
also had its personal reference within the feelings of the individual with key people like
Schleiermacher proclaiming that religion was a feeling of absolute dependence and does
not need an objective source, but is made up of the subjective feeling of dependence on
nature or society in its upward evolution.
This movement also gave the possibility of an evolution within organised religions too.
Ecumenism began as a movement, with Jesus seen as the ideal man and religion as
dependence focussed within a new ideal of one Church. Councils of Churches began to
form and those with the least authoritative theology were able to join quickly.
In the Roman Catholic Church, Alfred Loisy (1857-1940), a theologian, tried to
introduce the same ideas of modernist theology, but the Pope stood firm and he was
excommunicated.
By the time he was excommunicated for these anti scriptural views, by a Pope
considerably more orthodox than certain recent incumbents of the office, he had
admitted privately that he had even lost his belief in God and could no longer
believe in any spiritual reality whatever.178
The Fundamentals. The response of Conservative and Reformed theologians to the rise
of Modernist theology was to produce The Fundamentals. This was a series of scholarly
books (similar in style to the Reader's Digest) which were widely distributed to Christian
leaders in the English-speaking world. They were serious and well argued theologies.
But it quickly changed after 1925 and the Scopes Trial where a teacher, John Scopes,
was prosecuted for teaching evolutionary theory. The prosecution was like a circus and
the case polarised the United States into those who were modern and factually rational
and those who were fundamentalists and appeared irrational. And so began sociological
fundamentalism.
It became easier to deny the ill thought-out ideas of these people who were now
described as Fundamentalists. While they, saw themselves as persecuted and formed a
lifestyle to protect themselves from an evil society. They used their behaviour to define
themselves and they saw in the teaching of the New Testament, and particularly the
letters to the Corinthians, a doctrine of „separation’. This entailed a separation from the
world, society, alcohol, tobacco, and ecumenism. They formed their own Bible colleges
and before having their own radio stations, had been against the radio as a demonic
medium. They were strict in their observations of the Sabbath and formed their own
vocabulary. Some Like the Christian Brethren became very insular with an oversight of
men organising and pastoring their community.
They also had a strong stress of eschatology. This is seen in the writings and work in
178 John Warwick Montgomery, God's Inerrant Word. Trinity Press, Newburgh 1974, Page 27.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
78
John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) and also the Seventh-Day Adventists and the
Dispensationalism of the Scofield Bible.179 They felt there was no answer to modernism,
so they wanted to hold on to what they had, until the Lord returned.
Theologically the reasoning and argument put forward by these groups had become poor
and counter productive. They had kept the faith but withdrawn from the theological
world so that the Modernists were able to take all the places of influence - because the
Reformed Christians had moved out.
The devastation of World War One clearly showed that society was not getting better.
Philosophy and theology had to be re-thought. From the tragedy grew up a Neo-
orthodoxy. Theologians such as Karl Barth (1886-1968) and Emil Brunner (1889 –1966)
were quick to reject modernism. Barth tried to get back to classic Christianity. He saw
God as transcendent and not locked into his creation. Humanity was seen as depraved
and needing to be saved, the tragedy of war had proved it. There was a real need of a
saviour and Christ was the saviour provided. The Bible, he saw as a genuine revelation,
and man needs a personal conversion. However the idea of a fall in moral standing as
described in Genesis was declared a myth and did not occur. Christ is the saviour but it
is impossible to prove historically that his miracles and resurrection occurred because
the New Testament is not reliable. These things may have had a reality but not in the
ordinary history as open to investigation so the resurrection must be accepted by faith.
The real problem was arrogance and a rejection of the Bible as the inspired word of God.
The problem was not the convincing nature of liberal arguments – they are not
convincing. G K Chesterton recognised this in his classic Orthodoxy:
The religious liberal, having no firm anchor in eternity, built his Worldview on the
shifting sands of the Zietgeist; his theology is inherently unstable and he knows
it. He therefore resents, vainly tries to ignore, and subject to ridicule and calumny
the Orthodox believer, who claims to have an unchanging and certain message.180
As did G E Ladd
It must be recognised that modern Biblical criticism was not the product of a
believing scholarship concerned with a better understanding of the Bible as the
Word of God in its historical setting, but of a scholarship which rejected the
Bible’s claim to be the supernaturally inspired Word of God.181
And so John Warwick Montgomery concludes -
Conceivably, though the notion hardly accords with the arrogance of modernity,
Augustine, Aquinas, Michelangelo, Luther, Calvin, Pascal, Bach, Kepler, Wesley,
and a host of others too numerous to mention may have had better reason to
hold to scriptural authority than twentieth century man has to reject it. 182
179 Published in 1909 and based on the text of the Authorised Version, with very extensive notes in the text, by Cyrus I Schofield.
180 Quoted in The Suicide of Christian Theology, p 183. John Warwick Montgomery, Trinity Press, Newburgh 1996
181 The New Testament and Criticism, page 308, G E Ladd. Grand Rapid 1960
182 John Warwick Montgomery, God's inerrant word, Lessons from Luther on the Inerrancy of
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
79
In the 1950's Paul Tillich (1886–1965) began to have an increasing influence. He
believed we could have Christian faith even if there were no Christ or a Christ so remote
as to be unknown. His affirmation was that God is „being‟ itself, not „a being‟ but the
„ground of being‟. The Bible, Christ and the Church, can never be perfect but only
imperfect symbols of the „ultimate ground of being‟.
In the 1960's this had grown into Secular theology with writers such as John A. T.
Robinson (1919–1983), the Bishop of Woolwich. He had taken the insights of Situational
Ethics and rejected the esoteric nature of Existentialism. He wanted a way to make
theology practical. Many of the ideas were attributed to Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-
1945). Bonhoeffer had been both an existentialist and a Barthian theologian, who died
as a martyr and was therefore revered. He had tried to be practical in his theology by
asking- „Who is Christ for us today?’ He found Christ to be located in the Church and in
the „faith community‟ but not in Scriptures. He is to be found in action as in existential
decision-making and in „essence‟ as in Tillich's „ground of being‟. While in a concentration
camp, he located Christ in the secular society and talked about religionless Christianity.
Christ is hidden in the secular and we have to find him there. Christ does not control but
inhabits the situation.
The Secular theologians took up this idea in writings such as „Honest to God’ 183and
declared that God is not „up there‟, he is the „ground of being‟. Christ was seen as „the
man for others‟. Jesus was a model for us and not a saviour, as sin is not a reality. This
secular theology is lived out in Situational Ethics, where we are encouraged to act
„lovingly’ in every situation, regardless of any principles.
Bishop James Pike (1913-1969) was the counter to Robinson in the United States.
When pushed as to his authority after rejecting God, the Bible, the Church and
sacraments, he concluded that he must be the final authority in his own world and had in
effect become his own god.
This period had seen the rise of optimism again within popular culture. Humans had
made particular scientific and technological breakthroughs - a man had stood on the
Moon. So the optimism of Situational Ethics was brought into the corporate life of the
Church where it was declared that the Church should find the most loving thing to do,
and in so doing reach maturity of faith.
The Secular Theology led to a bombshell which featured on the cover of Time magazine.
It marked a logical conclusion to all that had gone before, and declared, „God is dead’. 184 Some Like Harvey Cox (b.1929), used the expression ‘God is dead’, as a metaphor
and form of poetry. He was saying that people are dead to God and so God is dead to
people. But others such as William Hamilton (b.1924) and Paul van Buren (1924-1998)
wanted to state that God had literally died.
Hamilton was a Biblical scholar who believed he could prove the death of God. He stated
that in the 19th century we saw Jesus‟ belief in demonology was wrong but we kept our
faith in Jesus. Later we discovered Jesus‟ belief in sin, the fall and creation, was false
Holy Writ,. Newburgh 1974, page 64
183 J A T Robinson, Honest to God, SCM Press, London 1963
184 "God Is Dead" We must recognize that the death of God is a historical event: God has died in our time, in our history, in our existence. TIME magazine, 8 April 1966
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
80
and he was a child of his own time. But we still kept with Jesus. Now we had discovered
that Jesus‟ eschatology was a myth he picked up from his day, and he was wrong. But
we still kept with Jesus. Now Hamilton looked at Jesus‟ belief about God and declared
that he was wrong, and we should be more grown-up in our approach and throw out the
mythical ideas of Jesus. God has gone and man had become central.
Barth had declared that God was transcendent and pushed him away until later theology
lost him all together. Existentialism said you will find God in your own experience. This
was subjective and had no objective reality. In existentialism God was allowed to die.
The poorer people of the world have been given a theology of their culture through
writers like Leonard Boff (b.1938). This Liberation Theology deals with the actual
situation. The Church has been seen as linked with the rich and Christians should be
linked with the poor. Wealth is evil. Salvation is total well-being for all. The Church is a
sacrament of liberation and there is no difference between the sacred and the secular
and no line between the believer and non- believer. There is no sin and no redemption.
This is the exact opposite of Prosperity Theology which has been prominent in the
United States where Christians have seen prosperity as a sign of God's blessing on those
who are obedient and faithful to him. All things which are needed for life and fulfilment
are available to those who are centred in the blessing of God.
Today we have difficulty communicating between Christians because we have different
assumptions about authority and the place of Scripture. These assumptions have been
further complicated by the claims and assumptions of the Charismatic movement. There
is still a desire for authority, but so often it is sought in experience. The study of
Scripture is not so strongly encouraged as a ‘Simple Faith’, even verging on the anti
intellectual, is assumed to be what God honours.
Many of the movements that have followed have seemed to be reactions of a frustrated
church seeking to deal with what C S Lewis calls „undulations‟ 185 - the fact that life is not
in a steady state but has peaks and troughs, the weariness of spiritual warfare and the
hard slog of following Christ in an alien world.
Loss of Nerve. In the midst of this milieu of the 20th Century there was a great loss of
nerve in defending the Faith. To seek to convert another person to the Christian faith
was seen as a most evil thing to do. Some of those who did engage in Apologetics in the
USA were strident and sometimes arrogant, which further stirred the reaction.
Professor Thomas Guarino found this attitude in the Catholic as well as the Protestant
community,
One reason Apologetics went into eclipse, of course, is that the discipline
smacked of arrogant, intolerant, and triumphal attitudes, capital sins in modern
intellectual life. For many, the very term ‘Apologetics’ brings to mind the
desiccated and jejune rationalism that, they imagine, Vatican II was striving to
overcome. 186
185 CS Lewis, Screwtape Letters. Collins Fontana, London,1963. Page 44
186 Thomas Guarino, Apologetics, Unapologetically. Magazine: First Things: A Monthly
Journal of Religion and Public Life. Issue: 161. March 2006. Page 53. Copyright 2006, Institute
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
81
John Stackhouse responded to this situation with his work, Humble Apologetics, and
gives the following half humorous definitions –
‘Apologetics’ is ‘telling someone why you're sorry you are a Christian.’ So the
word can sound, linked as it is with our everyday word ‘apologize.’ And clearly
Apologetics is a positive enterprise, not a regretful one! There is more than a
little irony in another whimsical definition: ‘Apologetics’ is ‘making someone sorry
he asked why you are a Christian!’ 187
He too joins with many who have found Apologetics a dangerous enterprise that has
caused people to be fearful or lose their nerve.
Apologetics is dangerous work. In an era in which voices from several sides
remind us of how problematic are human claims to knowledge; in a culture that
increasingly resists and resents anyone who seeks the conversion of another; and
in an activity whose stereotype is of rationalistic conceit and intellectual bullying -
what sensible, sensitive person would want to engage in Apologetics? 188
Cardinal Avery Dulles opens his imposing History of Apologetics189 by observing that
Today the term Apologetics carries unpleasant connotations. The apologist is
regarded as an aggressive, opportunistic person who tries, by fair means or foul,
to argue people into joining the Church. Numerous charges are laid at the door of
Apologetics: its neglect of grace, of prayer, and of the life-giving power of the
word of God; its tendency to oversimplify and syllogize the approach to faith; its
dilution of the scandal of the Christian message; and its implied presupposition
that God's word should be judged by the norm of fallible, not to say fallen, human
reason.
Earlier in the century C. S. Lewis concluded an address to fellow apologists -
I have found that nothing is more dangerous to one's own faith than the work of
an apologist. No doctrine of that Faith seems to me so spectral, so unreal as one
that I have just successfully defended in a public debate. For a moment, you see,
it has seemed to rest on oneself: as a result, when you go away from that
debate, it seems no stronger than that weak pillar. That is why we apologists take
our lives in our hands and can be saved only by falling back continually from the
web of our own arguments, as from our intellectual counters, into the Reality -
from Christian Apologetics into Christ Himself. That also is why we need one
another's continual help - oremus pro invicem [Let us pray for each other]. 190
of Religion and Public Life.
187 John G. Stackhouse, Humble Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today, Oxford University Press. New York. 2002. Page 227
188 ibid
189 Avery Dulles, A History of Apologetics, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2005
190 C. S. Lewis, “Christian Apologetics,” in C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
82
For the Christian this created problems. How could the existence of God be proved and
what sort of God did such proofs disclose? One response was fideism, which said that our
faith in God was real, but could not be proved and if it could be, it would not be faith.
Others relied on subjective experience and such a response is illustrated in the hymn of
Alfred H. Ackley, „I serve a risen Saviour‟. It states,
I know that he is living, whatever men may say …
You ask me how I know He lives. He lives within my heart.
The seeds of this crisis in Apologetics were not just the liberal and secular attacks on the
Faith, but also the shift in Evangelical Theology where there was an abandoning of the
strong emphasis on factual evidences for Christianity that had characterized the work of
BB Warfield, Charles Hodge and Gresham Machen. It was replaced by a very strong
emphasis on Presuppositional Apologetics, which denies the value of evidence.
Harriet Harris records how –
Shortly before his death Dr. Machen had been shocked to learn that this change
had occurred, not only because it would undercut a large part of the work to
which his life had been devoted, but also because he knew that such an anti-
intellectual attitude would greatly diminish the effectiveness of the graduates in
Christian thinking and evangelism. 191
This was my experience when I studied the curriculum of the London University
Department of Theology in the 1960‟s we were taught that all the Theistic Proofs of
Aquinas should be learned and understood – but we should recognise that none of them
stood up to reason. H D Lewis, Professor of the History and Philosophy of Religion in the
University of London, laid down the ground rules -
The benefit we derive from the study of the traditional arguments is thus two-
fold; we appreciate in the first instance how they fail as arguments, and in the
second place we acquire an insight into the movement of thought which lies
behind them and makes them plausible.192
The conclusion was that there is a gap between certainty and uncertainty about God.
Examining each of the theistic proofs available, in isolation, showed each was faulty and
broken. They were like a heap of broken planks and one cannot build a bridge to span a
gap with broken planks. Therefore we should be very uncertain about God and truth and
instead celebrate the inspiration of the stories of Jesus and emphasise the spirituality of
men and women.
I remember as a student in the foremost Evangelical college in the UK, discovering the
books on Apologetics occupied only a small space on one shelf in the College Library.
There was no formal teaching of Apologetics and no one told me these most helpful
and Ethics, ed. Walter Hooper, Erdmans, Grand Rapids, 1970, Page 103.
191 Harriet A. Harris, Fundamentalism and Evangelicals. Clarendon Press. Oxford. 1998. Page
254
192 H. D. Lewis, Our Experience of God: Allen & Unwin. London. 1959. Page 42.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
83
books were there!
In the 1970‟s I studied theology for two years at Durham University and the nearest we
got to Apologetics was the insistence that every student read ‘Mere Christianity’ by CS
Lewis, before beginning any other studies.
About the only other book that the average UK Christian would have come across to help
them in defending their faith was „Who moved the Stone?‟ 193 which dealt with evidence
for the resurrection. Having checked with several theological colleges I discover that
Apologetics today is still not regarded as essential and generally is not taught.
Savonarola gives courage to the nervous and challenges us by his own life laid down.
But particularly he enables us to find confidence by providing the clearest understanding
of the Apologetic task, the reasons for undertaking that task, the method of approaching
that task and the place of that task within the grace of God.
13 His Apologetic deals with the weaknesses and blunders in current
Apologetics
Note that I do not use the word „blunder’ in a pejorative sense, but simply to indicate a
course of action or an approach to a problem that is undertaken without sufficient
thought and which results in an outcome that might well be good, but is less than best.
Having given a brief account of the history behind the loss of nerve in Apologetics, we
must now consider the state of Apologetics in the 21st Century. As we consider the
weaknesses and the blunders, we should note how Savonarola‟s approach - bringing all
the evidences together as a unity - avoids the blunders and overcomes the weaknesses.
The blunder of making Apologetics a professional occupation rather than every
believer’s responsibility.
Because Apologetics has not been taught to the believers the loss of nerve has filtered
down from the academic world to the church fellowship. Those who do engage in
lecturing and writing in defence of the faith are regarded as professionals in a
professional world, where amateurs venture at some risk. This has resulted in the sad
situation where most believers are fully aware of the attacks on the Faith and know of
Richard Dawkins, but few know of any refutation of his arrogant polemics.
The New Testament clearly sees the apologetic task of providing an „answer‟ was the
responsibility of each believer. Col. 4:6 Let your conversation be always full of grace,
seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.
Often it is seen as non-optional, especially in times of persecution. In such times the
believer is told to trust the help of the Holy Spirit rather than some academic training.
193 Frank Morison, Who Moved the Stone?, revised edition, Faber and Faber, London, 1975
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
84
Jesus says, Luke 12:11-12 When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and
authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say, for
the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say.
God has equipped every believer with an authoritative word – the Bible, a mind to
reflect and reason, a conversion experience as a testimony, the witness of the Spirit and
the fruit of the Spirit in Christian behaviour, placed him in a team (the church) along
with other believers. Each has been given a Christian worldview that has integrity, and
the ability to challenge the worldviews of others – simply by asking questions such as –
„why do you say that?‟ The available apologetic answers we can provide, if taught and
encouraged, are not just emotional and subjective.
All of this provides material for the Holy Spirit to use in drawing men to Christ. We are
called to be witnesses, not to do the work of grace. It is the Father who draws men to
Christ and the Holy Spirit wants to use the believer as a witness. Our world of competing
worldviews, cultures and religions, leaves us no place for neutrality. Our style of life
(what the New Testament calls our „conversation’) is part of the „answer‟ God calls us to
make.
This professionalising of Apologetics has had the additional sad implication that giving an
„answer‟ is purely a matter of logic and reasoning powers. But this is a spiritual more
than philosophical enterprise. That is why St. Paul stated categorically that faith cannot
be produced by argument.
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us
who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: ‘I will destroy the
wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.’ Where is
the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has
not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God
the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the
foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 1 Cor. 1:18-25
As Robert Brow says in his Origin of Religions 194,
If faith was the result of logical reasoning we would expect all the most
intelligent people to be converted to one religion or ideology. It seems that God in
his wisdom has insisted on freedom of religion, and this freedom cannot be forced
by human reason or logic.
A further aspect of the professionalising of Apologetics is the confused use of technical
terms which leave believers totally confused. An example is the recent (September
2008) reaction from the British Royal Society when it was suggested that Creationism
should be discussed in science lessons if raised by pupils. This was dismissed by the
Society as a primitive and ignorant thing to do and that Creationism should be banned
from discussion. The Anglican Church, in the Saturday edition of The Times for 13
September 2008, quickly asserted that Christians do not believe in Creationism. But the
very next day, Sunday, the Church expected all to share in the Creed, stating that we
believe in God the creator of heaven and earth. What clearer evidence can there be for
194 Robert Brow, Origins of Religion in The World's Religions, Lion Publishing. Tring, England, 1994.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
85
the need of Apologetics to find its rightful place in the teaching of every fellowship of
believers.
The blunder of allowing Apologetics to become too esoteric and therefore of
little use to the ordinary believer.
Following on from what has been said about the professionalising of Apologetics, is the
blunder of presenting Apologetics in forms that are too esoteric and unintelligible. For
example, whole books are written showing that some extremely complex geological
finding probably indicates that creation is more likely than evolution. But the ordinary
reader does not have the training to evaluate what is presented and they do not have
the material evidence or laboratory equipment to verify what is said.
c) The blunder of allowing Apologetics to become detached from our Christian
purpose – to witness to Christ and the gospel.
So some apologists argue effectively that there is an intelligent designer behind our
universe, or that there must be a First Cause – but their conclusion leaves us completely
detached from proving that this is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The
outcome of this approach is seen in the experience of Antony Flew, who after a lifetime
of teaching atheism, moved to being a theist – because the evidence is so strong. But
there is no evidence that he has become a follower of Jesus Christ.
In January 2004, at 81 years old, the legendary British philosopher and atheist
and icon and champion for unbelievers for decades – changed his mind. His
change of mind is significant news, not only about his personal journey, but also
about the persuasive power of the arguments modern theists have been using to
challenge atheistic naturalism. In an interview he declared that his former
writings were obsolete and that he had been particularly influenced by the
evidence for intelligent design.195
d) The blunder of thinking that one piece of evidence in some field of science
or philosophy may be presented as decisive and the final proof of God.
One example is the way in which whole books and departments have been devoted to
the proving of the Turin Shroud as the shroud of Christ. Or another example - the idea
that the protein Lamenin is the glue that holds the human body together and is in the
shape of a cross, like the one on which Jesus died, is proof that He is at the heart of all
things.
A typical response to such isolated evidence is found in an Internet blog –
I could barely make it through his over-energetic rant, but what I got out of it is
that he is desperately trying to make one Christian molecular biologist’s opinion
about one particular protein in the body that ‘holds’ it all together (isn't that what
proteins do anyway?) and trying to make it sound like the solid piece of proof that
195 My Pilgrimage from Atheism to Theism An Exclusive Interview with Former British Atheist Professor Antony Flew and Dr Gary Habermas, published in ‘Philosophia Christi’.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
86
Christians have been waiting for since the dawn of the religion.196
e) The blunder of presenting the message of Christ and a Christian apologetic
in a way that avoids all association with the world’s criticism of the Church and
Christians.
Many of the polemic atheistic writers have expressed hatred of the Church and blamed
the Church for the evils in the world. They use simplistic slogans – ‘Religion is the cause
of all the wars and divisions in the world’. Feeling the heat of the attack, some
evangelists have tried to distance themselves from the Church. Their apologetic has
been to say that the Church is boring and possibly irrelevant and Christians are not
perfect and some have been evil. But Jesus is worth considering because he was not part
of the Church and he was perfect. One should not be too concerned about the Church,
but just consider the possibility of a relationship between ‘you and Jesus’.
The problem with this approach is immediately seen when a person comes to trust in
Christ and they are then told that they should join a local church. This is a complete
reversal of what they had been previously told.
Can you have an apologetic without the Church? The truth is that it is not possible to
have an apologetic without including the Church. It is part of the evidence. Creation
shows the glory of God but also the Church and its experience reflects the glory of
God.197
Savonarola makes a clear distinction between the political body of the Church and the
entire body of believers bound in fellowship by the Holy Spirit. CS Lewis in his Screwtape
Letters, writes a parable about the demonic world and has one senior demon writing to a
junior about a convert to Christianity.
One of our great allies at present is the church itself. Do not misunderstand me. I
do not mean the church as we see her spread out through all time and space and
rooted in eternity, terrible as an army with banners. That I confess is a spectacle
which makes our boldest tempters uneasy. But fortunately it is quite invisible to
these humans. All your patient sees is the half-finished sham gothic erection on
the new building estate. When he goes inside he sees the local grocer with rather
an oily expression on his face bustling up to offer him one shiny little book
containing a liturgy which neither of them understands. 198
When dealing with the failures of the Church and criticisms that are offered, we need to
respond with respect and gentleness. We should agree with what is provable and regret
it. We should show that what is criticised is not integral to Christ's teaching and
sometimes amounts to a clear rejection of his purposes. A parallel might be drawn with
the world of medicine where a number of evil doctors down through the years have used
their power and resources to accomplish great harm. But that does not mean that
196 http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t126112.html
197 John 15:8 This is to my Father's glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my
disciples.
198 CS Lewis, Screwtape Letters, Collins Fontana, London, 1963. Page 15
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
87
medical skills are to be rejected wholesale, nor that all doctors are evil. In fact, the
reason we recognise the enormity of the evil is because it is a travesty of the purpose of
medicine. So too with the Church.
Brian Hepplethwaite comments on the importance of the witness of the Church and the
way it has impacted society for good.
So, I suggest, there are further appeals to history to be added to the cumulative
case for Christian belief. In addition to natural theology and the inner rationale of
Christian doctrine, in addition to the history of morality and religion, in addition to
the faith of Israel and the story of Jesus, not least his Resurrection, in addition to
the lives of the saints and the Christian Church, in so far as it actually does
embody and manifest the fruits of the Spirit, the apologist will also appeal to the
ways in which the values of the Kingdom can be seen to have penetrated society
and made their contribution to the redemption of the world.. 199
The Christian church it has been suggested may well rejoice that its spiritual
goods now exist in secular form. Secular respect for freedom of conscience and
the dignity of the person, secular commitment to the protection of the
handicapped, universal schooling and many other features of the modern state
may be regarded as secularised church treasures.200
We need to see that there can be no full Apologetic without the Church. It is part of the
purpose of Christ, who said, I will build my Church,201 and by this all men will know that
you are my disciples, if you love one another.202
Even in the terrible corruption of the Church in the 15th Century, Savonarola is able to
identify the true Church as a work of Christ. Because it is central he discloses that the
chariot in his motif of the Triumph of the Cross, is actually the Church.
If we carefully examine the works which Christ has performed, and still does
perform, in His Church (represented by this Chariot), we shall begin to be filled
with wonder. This will lead us to diligently seek out the cause of those works, and
as we do, we shall gradually rise to the knowledge of invisible things, and of the
divine majesty of Christ.203
Savonarola has a high doctrine of the Church. Like St Paul he would delight that Christ
loved the Church and gave himself for her. 204 He believed that the true Church was
made up of all those who were in a saving relationship with Christ as Lord. In his day,
the only place he could find the true Church was embedded in the Roman Catholic
Church. This because it was the only really functioning expression of the Church in the
West of Europe. He also valued the link with St Peter as first bishop of Rome, but was
199 Brian Hepplethwaite, In Defence of Christianity, Oxford University press, Oxford 2005 page 149
200 ibid page 134
201 Matt. 16:18
202 John 13:35
203 TOTC – page 85
204 Ephes. 5:25
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
88
appalled by the state of the administration and leadership of organised religion.
f) The blunder of moving to the relativism of a pluralistic and blunted gospel.
In our Churches as well as in society, the secularists have become the high priests of
modernist thought. Their gospel is offered as one truth among many. There can be no
mention of a saviour, for we need none, nor of resurrection because it is incredible. To
reach unbelievers with such a gospel is not an urgency nor terribly important. To
confront such attitudes, so prevalent in church and in society, we are going to need both
competent apologetic and passionate commitment to evangelism.
Preaching on Acts 4:12, Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other
name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved, Michael Green said -
Yes this is an incredibly strong statement, all the more so because two different
Greek words are used for the word 'other' which comes twice in it. Peter is saying
that there is no 'additional' way of salvation, no 'Jesus and...' and no 'alternative'
way of salvation, no Krishna, no Muhammad as the way to salvation. That is very
tough. It is the height of political incorrectness. And you will find fierce opposition
to it in much of the church, which is so inclusive without the need for
transformation that Jesus almost becomes unnecessary, and faith in him is an
optional extra.205
Savonarola is equally clear -
From what has just been said, it is evident, that Christianity is the only true
religion. And if this is the case, then there is no salvation except through faith in
Christ, and all, except Christians, must be living in error.206
g) The blunder of presenting several or even many apologetic arguments
without ever seeing the relationship between them.
Apologetics has not only been professionalised, it has splintered in various specialist
areas. Each area is seen as self contained and valid in itself. Rather like the illustration of
the blind men examining different parts of an elephant.
Francis A. Schaeffer in The God Who Is There, notes this tendency to compartmentalise
learning and Apologetics and sees its roots in specialised education.
In our modern forms of specialized education there is a tendency to lose the
whole in the parts, and in this sense we can say that our generation produces few
truly educated people. True education means thinking by associating across the
various disciplines, and not just being highly qualified in one field, as a technician
might be. I suppose no discipline has tended to think more in fragmented fashion
205 Michael Green, sermon, 2nd October 2008 at installation of Rev. Dr. Justyn Terry as the new
president at Trinity School for Ministry at St. Stephens, Sewickley, PA.
206 TOTC – Page 168
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
89
than the orthodox or evangelical theology of today. Those standing in the stream
of historic Christianity have been especially slow to understand the relationships
between various areas of thought. 207
A number of Apologists have noted the weakness in putting forward one argument at a
time and then to have it countered or dismissed as of limited significance. There is also
the danger that if one has only one tool, for example a hammer, then one will think that
all problems can be solved by hitting them, because it is the only resource available. This
approach is not only crude – it can be destructive.
Their response has been to catalogue as many Apologetic reasons as possible and to try
to win the argument by quantity. Others like Norman Geisler and Phil Fernandes have
tried to form a stronger apologetic by presenting some linkage between the different
reasons. Phil Fernandes takes this approach in the Theism vs. Atheism debate with
Michael Martin, where he forms what he calls The Cumulative Case for God. He describes
this as Interdisciplinary Apologetics, and says that it is easier to deal with some attacks
by drawing on several areas of Apologetics rather than to offer answers from one
approach alone. This is particularly true when dealing with questions of ethics, theodicy,
or the inspiration and veracity of Scripture.
However Savonarola has shown that it is the holistic and integrated philosophy of the
Christian Faith which makes the argument so much stronger and effective. We need to
present the answer as a whole, not a random collection of parts.
h) The blunder of presenting Apologetics as a reactive exercise; trying to
defend the Faith against hostile arguments.
This usually involves a response to some argument or claim and can give the impression
of weakness as arguments are conceded or accommodated.
An example of this weak apologetic approach is given by Sir Jonathan Sacks, the Chief
Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth. Writing in an article in
The Times, London, August 29, 2008, in response to Richard Dawkins‟ book The God
Delusion208 and TV series on Darwin, Sacks says -
We will no doubt hear it asserted that Darwin dealt a death blow to religious
belief. That, it should be said, is quite untrue. What it dealt a death blow to was
one very poor argument for the existence of God, namely the argument from
design. This argument figures nowhere in the Hebrew Bible. It does not even
belong to its world of thought. It belongs instead to the tradition of Ancient
Greece and to the idea that the most important truths are those that can be
proved. In fact none of the most important truths can be proved.
In saying this he not only concedes the argument from design too cheaply, but veers
toward fideism by inferring that the most important truths are not those that can be
proven. In effect he is stepping back from the argument and saying that ‘proof’ is not an
207 Francis A. Schaeffer, The God Who Is There, Inter Varsity Press, London 1968, Ch. 1
208 Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, Bantam Press, London, 2006
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
90
issue for the believer – without ever defining proof.
To complete his apologetic Sacks then lists a set of issues and implies that if Dawkins
could deal a blow to each of these issues – then God would have nowhere to hide, he
would be a delusion.
The believer might mention other mysteries, such as how did life evolve from
non-life? How did sentience emerge? How was the uniquely human capacity for
self-consciousness born? How did life evolve at such speed that even Francis
Crick, co-discoverer of DNA, was forced to suggest that it came from Mars? And
the ultimate ontological question: why is there something rather than nothing?
None of these is a proof. Each, rather, is a source of wonder.
Sadly much of today‟s Apologetics makes such defensive and unsure piecemeal
responses to arguments which should be refuted, not conceded or accommodated. (A
better approach is to stand firm and show that in his argument, Dawkins is out of his
depth in The God Delusion and is easily refuted by a competent philosopher like Alvin
Plantinga.209)
Savonarola avoids all of these blunders.
Savonarola avoids all of these blunders by showing that all the evidence fits together as
a unity and forms an integrated philosophy. In doing this he is not only able to be our
contemporary and speak in our terms, he is in fact our master. He truly was a most
profound and original teacher and can be viewed as the Father of Modern Apologetics.
His schema begins with evidence for the existence of God and what it means for the
nature of humans if God is our creator. If God is our creator he must have had a
purpose, and the purpose must have an effective means to enable it to be achieved. The
means of God‟s effective working is his grace displayed in the person and work of Christ.
Christ must be the incarnate God because the effects of his power are proof of his claims
and are seen in the transformed lives of Christians. He is also affirmed as God become
man, by his claims and teaching. His teaching is significant and surpasses anything seen
or heard before. It reveals spiritual truth unavailable to reason alone and includes twelve
basic doctrines, which are detailed in the Creed. Its ethical content is revealed in the Ten
Commandments and the whole is given living expression in the Church, which Christ
promised to build. This Church has been guided by the revelation and record given in
Holy Scripture. This body of evidence provides a rational and integrated apologetic and
Worldview. This Worldview is more reasonable and better supported by experience than
any other explanation of life and its purpose. It can be compared and contrasted with
the philosophy of secular humanism, the hopes and beliefs of Judaism, the objectives of
Islam, the New Age and ancient Asian religions and of occult practices and astrology.
Because Christianity is centred on truth it is unsurprising that it should be the most
rational and most integrated and consistent Worldview and its gospel the most wonderful
news one could imagine.
209 See - Alvin Plantinga, The Dawkins Confusion - Naturalism ad absurdum, Books & Culture, March/April 2007. Available at http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
91
14 His - Triumph of the Cross
Savonarola wrote The Triumph of the Cross in late 1496, completing it about the time of
his excommunication in 1497. It was officially published a year later and became a great
success.
The Motif of Petrarch
The iconic device of a Triumph does not refer to the battle and victory won, but
specifically to the Victory Parade when the „triumph‟ was displayed and celebrated. It
was a motif used by Petrarch Francesco Petrarca (1304-1374) an earlier resident of
Florence, who had a huge influence on the literature and art of Florence. He was a
brilliant poet, musician, scholar, humanist and diplomat. His abiding legacy has been the
sonnet form of poetry. In his sonnets he used the motif of a triumphal entry, based on
ancient Roman military processions. It became a literary and artistic device for
celebrating love, fame, virtue and other popular Renaissance themes. But in a darker
mood in the „Triumph of Death', Petrarch reminded Christians that those human victories
were short-lived.
Clearly Savonarola was adopting a motif that was familiar and using it for his own
purpose. He converts the secular Renaissance triumph into a vivid metaphor of Christ‟s
victory over sin and death.
Let us, picture in our minds, a four-wheeled chariot on which is seated Christ. As
conqueror, he is crowned with thorns, and bears the marks of His wounds,
showing that it is through His passion and death that He has overcome the world.
Over His head shines a light like a triple sun. This represents the Blessed Trinity,
which envelops His humanity, and the whole Church, with unspeakable splendour.
In His left hand Christ holds the Cross and the instruments210 of His passion, in
His right, the Old and the New Testaments. At His feet are the bread and wine of
Communion;211 the oil for blessing and healing;212 and the other symbols of the
sacraments. The Blessed Mother of God,213 the Virgin Mary, is seated beneath her
Son. Around, and below her, are vessels of gold, silver and precious stones, filled
with ashes and bones of the dead. The Apostles and Preachers go before the
Chariot, appearing to draw it along. The Patriarchs, the Prophets, and
innumerable men and women of the Old Testament precede them. The Chariot is
210 The tools used at His crucifixion.
211 „Host and chalice’
212 „Vessels of balsam and oil’
213 Mother of God is a title of honour given to Mary the mother of Jesus. The title tells us
something about Jesus. It affirms that she was His mother and He had a supernatural conception, but a natural birth. So He was truly human. But He was also divine because Mary had given birth to a uniquely conceived child. This child was the Lord – the Old Testament title for God. The title does not indicate that Mary was the First Cause in bringing God into being, but is based on the incident in Luke‟s gospel. Luke 1:41-43 When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. [42] In a loud voice she exclaimed:
‘Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! [43] But why am I so favoured, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
92
encircled by the army of Martyrs, forming as it were a crown. They, again, are
surrounded by the Doctors of the Church, bearing open books. Around them are
circled a countless multitude of virgins, of both sexes, adorned with lilies. Behind
the Chariot follow crowds of men and women of all nations and backgrounds -
Jews, Greeks, Romans, barbarians, rich and poor, learned and simple, small and
great, old and young; all of whom together, are praising Christ.
All around this whole host, gathered from the Old and from the New Testaments,
are the crowded ranks of the enemies of the Church of Christ - emperors and
kings, princes and men of power, sages, philosophers, heretics, slaves and
freemen, men and women, rich and poor, learned and simple - people of every
race and of every tongue. Whilst around them lie smashed and broken idols,
burnt heretical books, and the defeated remains of all sects and false religions.214
Having established this triumphal motif, he goes on to build an apologetic for the Faith
as an integrated whole philosophy. It involves a dialectic discussion of the visible and
invisible worlds, reason and faith, body and spirit, nature and grace, ceremonial religion
and religion of the heart.215
His readers in Florence would also remember the triumphal entry of King Charles VIII,
into their city. It was a time of great rejoicing and hope, a time of pomp and ceremony.
There was a display of power but it was beneficent and concluded with prayers in the
Duomo. Such a spectacle would naturally colour the motif in the minds of the readers.
The work of Averroes
But it is probable that there was another influence which prompted the writing and the
form of this work. Averroes (1126 - 1198) whose Arabian name was Abdul Muhammad
Ibn Rushd, was an Islamic - Arabian philosopher. He lived in Spain, working as a
physician. His philosophical teaching, called Averroism was based on Aristotle's belief
that any event or existence can only be explained by discussion of its material, formal,
efficient and final cause. He spent three decades producing multiple commentaries on all
of Aristotle‟s works, except his Politics, covering every subject from aesthetics and ethics
to logic and zoology. He also wrote about Plato‟s Republic, and the works of Nicolaus of
Damascus, and Ptolemy. His commentaries and books were known in Florence and
regarded highly. Savonarola makes reference to them in TOTC - Book 4 chapter 2.
It is possible that the Prior adopted the basic presuppositions for his work from a major
work of Averroes. The Islamic Scholar had written a treatise on the doctrine of God
known as Al-Kashf 'an Manahij al-Adilla fi ‘Aqaid al-Milla (the Exposition of the Methods
of Proof Concerning the Beliefs of the Community). His purpose was to examine religious
beliefs and doctrines to see if they were consistent with the intention of „Allah.‟ He
begins by examining the arguments for the existence of God and favours the argument
from Providence, which parallels the modern Anthropic Principle. He said that one can
214 TOTC – Page 84
215 Donald Weinstein, Savonarola: Piety, Prophecy and Politics in Renaissance Florence,
Bridwell Library, Dallas, 1994, pp. 11-12
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
93
observe that everything in the universe serves the purpose of humanity. The sun, the
moon, the earth and the weather are examples of how the universe is conditioned for
humans. If the universe is, then, so finely tuned, then there must be a fine tuner - God.
After establishing the existence of God, Averroes went on to describe the nature and
attributes of God, beginning with the doctrine of divine unity. Then he moves from the
attributes of God to the actions of God, and a definition of creation, including a polemic
against the philosophers who held the eternal existence of the physical universe.
Clearly the major starting point of Averroes and Savonarola are very similar and one
may have been the inspiration of the other. But having started out, then the Triumph of
the Cross covers far more topics and territory and has an entirely different destination.
Parallel with Romans
The epistle of St Paul to the Romans provides a close parallel with the schema of
Savonarola. Both authors present the Christian Philosophy as an integrated whole, and
that its „wholeness‟ is the key to and strength of their Apologetic argument.
Shaeffer said that he would use the whole of Romans to present the Christian message
rather than rely on proof texts and a fragmentary communication. John Stackhouse also
recognises the importance of getting people to read the Bible as a primary text.
Many Christians, in fact, seem reluctant even to suggest Bible reading to their
friends for fear, perhaps, that they will be seen as ‘pushing too hard.’ Yet
students of any religion know that reading the primary text of a religion is a
necessary part of one's acquaintance with it. Indeed, God's Holy Spirit
characteristically impresses the truth of the Bible on people's minds such that
they just believe it to be the very Word of God. People come to believe that the
Bible is the Word of God by encountering it and then simply seeing that it is such.
Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin described and defended this phenomenon in the
language of their day; philosopher Alvin Plantinga216 has done so in our own. 217
Savonarola was well acquainted with Romans. He quotes from the epistle several
times and it could well have been an influence, consciously or unconsciously, in forming
his Apologetic.
St Paul’s argument in his letter to the Romans
St Paul‟s argument flows through the entire epistle as he expounds the whole Christian
philosophy. He begins with the statement that he is a servant of the gospel and then
moves into the exposition of the gospel. Paul the Apostle, from his Jewish background of
legal training and analysis of the Torah, and from his knowledge of the history of Israel,
216 See Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000. Cf. Nicholas Wolterstorff, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim that God Speaks: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995
217 John G. Stackhouse Jr, Humble Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today. Oxford University
Press: New York. 2002. Page 195.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
94
is able to discern a God who is ethically consistent and faithful. A God we can rely upon.
All sense of rightness comes from the righteousness of God. The Apostle Paul is
able to present an integrated theology of God's plan of salvation, because he has a firm
belief in a moral and consistent holy God. The key word is „righteousness’, used 35
times. This word sums up for St Paul, the ethical standards of holiness, and consistent
action, within the fellowship of the holy Trinity. This concept of the relationship of love
and collaboration between the members of the Godhead is equally as important as the
right activity and correct moral choices of a holy God. As far as humans are concerned
the idea of „righteousness’ is rooted in the purpose of creation, with humans brought
into a living relationship with God – as a part of his household.
Deut. 10:12 And now, O Israel, what does the Lord your God ask of you but to
fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the Lord
your God with all your heart and with all your soul,
God’s grace lifts us into the righteousness of God. So for St Paul, the glory of the
Gospel is that God has found a way to be ethically consistent in showing mercy, and in
grace he goes on to lift us into a relationship with himself, which is „righteousness’.
St Paul’s use of ethics. Romans is not a treatise on ethics, but a full analysis of the
Gospel. However the gospel has its context within the heart and activity of a holy God.
Romans 1:17 For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a
righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: ‘The
righteous will live by faith.’
From this framework, St Paul is able to describe
The moral accountability and guilt of mankind,
The moral consistency of God in redemption,
The behaviour required of those who are Justified by grace.
The moral accountability and guilt of mankind - the Gentiles are guilty. St Paul
begins his argument by proving the guilt of the Gentiles, before a holy God. His test for
judgment is the Righteousness of God. Gentiles are guilty because they are out of
fellowship with God (a consequence of sin).
Romans 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the
godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
They have wrong motives and seek to please themselves. They have wrong actions and
do what is repugnant to God. They have a problem with their knowledge of God and his
demands, but any claim of ignorance actually compounds guilt, because what could be
known of God has been ignored. (note the common root of Ignorance and Ignore) or
suppressed.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
95
God’s basis of ethical judgment. The truth of God is his ethical consistency, which
has been revealed and enables St Paul to deduce the basis of God‟s Judgment. His
judgment will be on the basis of moral acts. What has been done and what are the
consequences.
Romans 2:2 Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such
things is based on truth.
Romans 2:6 God ‘will give to each person according to what he has done.’
His judgment will include Motivation and Conscience and his judgment will be impartial.
Romans 2:11 For God does not show favouritism (since they show that the
requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also
bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)
This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus
Christ, as my gospel declares.
The Jews are guilty. The Jews are in a more serious state because their knowledge of
God and his law, was fuller than that revealed to the gentiles. They have the ceremonies
associated with a righteous relationship with God, but their heart (Motivation and
relationship) is not right. Claiming what is untrue about their relationship with God
further compounds their guilt.
Romans 2:17 Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag
about your relationship to God; Romans 2:24 As it is written: ‘God's name is
blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.’
The world is guilty. In chapter three St Paul describes the world as guilty. None are
righteous, all are ignorant of God‟s will and purposes, all are out of relationship with
God, all have corrupt motivation with evil desires and thoughts leading to evil actions,
and in being in this state, they have seared their consciences. This is what is described
as total depravity. Not that man is as corrupt as possible, but that corruption has
affected every aspect of his moral character.
Romans 3:18 ‘There is no fear of God before their eyes.’
Only a religion that acknowledges a source of grace and power outside of man
can speak to this condition.218
The moral consistency of God in redemption. The Law of God has defined sin, but is
unable to offer a means to solve mankind‟s moral dilemma. God is left in the position of
a moral Agent, who has limited options. One option is to destroy his corrupt creation.
But this is not possible because he is true to his attribute of Love and his Motivation is to
show grace. However this does not leave an opportunity to just disregard sin, because
his holiness has been provoked to judgment. The solution is the redemption of mankind
218 Geoffrey B Wilson, Romans, Banner of Truth Trust, London 1969, page 74
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
96
by the saving act of Christ. His action on our behalf is received by us through faith.
Romans 3:24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that
came by Christ Jesus.
But it is not achieved by overlooking sin. All are guilty of wrong actions and being out of
relationship with God.
Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
So God has to judge sin
Romans 3:25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his
blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had
left the sins committed beforehand unpunished - he did it to demonstrate his
justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who
have faith in Jesus.
There are those who accuse God of acting un-ethically, if this were the case. It would
mean that an innocent was caused to suffer for the guilty. This would be unjust.
However, as Norman Geisler points out, Graded Absolutism is a position that suggests
there are higher and lower moral laws. Jesus himself spoke of the least and the greatest
of the commandments. In some cases there are unavoidable moral conflicts. Such a
conflict is seen in the cross of Christ. Here the right thing to do was to fulfil the higher
law. Jesus fulfilled the just demands of a Holy God, he fulfilled the Loving Purpose of a
Gracious God and both of these actions rank above that of freely laying down a life.
It is wrong that the innocent should suffer on behalf of the guilty, yet he suffered for our
sins and we are declared justified. This is a problem for the liberal theologian who cannot
see that both moral laws are not of equal weight and that the saving of the souls of
humanity is of greater consequence.219
Proofs of God’s consistency and of the gospel. St Paul goes on to show that this
gospel is consistent with the way God has always been operating in relationship with
man. Abraham was accepted by faith, as was Moses.
The results of the gospel. God is enabled to justify those who trust in Christ, not only
is sin forgiven, but also the key relationship with God is restored. Wrath is turned away
and glory is promised.
Romans 5:9-10 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more
shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! For if, when we were God's
enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much
more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!
219 Norman L Geisler, Christian Ethics – Options and Issues, Baker Book House 1990, his
argument page 217.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
97
The basis for this righteousness is the action of Christ. Sin came through one man‟s
disobedience, and through one man‟s sacrificial obedience, there is a greater effect and
Christ is able to reverse the consequences of sin. St Paul is saying in effect, ‘If one man
could cause all this sin, then it would only take one man to reverse it, if that man were
perfect and fulfilled the requirements of the righteousness of God.
The behaviour required of those who are justified by grace. Having been brought
into a new relationship with God, how are we to live? If faith brings forgiveness, can we
just live in sin and call down cleansing as required? As Winston Churchill described the
behaviour of some young men, „They sow their wild oats and then pray to God for a
crop failure.‟
Romans 6:1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may
increase?
St Paul now begins to lay the foundation for his Christian ethic.
As dead to sin. We are to live as if dead to sin and alive to righteousness. This
means that we can be morally free. The act of faith is to identify with Christ and as
he died with our sin upon him and rose morally clean, he was taking our place and
we must identify with his action by being willing to die to sin and to rise to live clean
in him. Death was the way to kill off the natural bias (nature) of sin. Now we are free
agents – free to live for God.
Romans 6:14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but
under grace.
As slaves. We have been bought by God and are in moral obligation to him. This
is sanctification.
Romans 6:20-23 When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of
righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now
ashamed of? Those things result in death! But now that you have been set free from
sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the
result is eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in
Christ Jesus our Lord.
As related to Christ. We were in relationship to the law, and out of relationship
with God. Now we have a new relationship in Christ. Our Motivation is now no longer
a written code which condemns, but the life of the Spirit of Jesus within. The Law
dealt with actions, but the Spirit gets to our hearts. Romans 7:6 But now, by dying
to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the
new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
As living in the Spirit. The Spirit of God at work in our hearts gives new
motivation and power to live in righteousness. The Holy Spirit is the very life of God
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
98
within us. This key area of righteousness is not just DEEDS, but relationship.
Romans 8:9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if
the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he
does not belong to Christ. 8:15 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a
slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship.
The change of behaviour is not a result of resolve, but of relationship. A relationship
leading to glory.
A New Ethical Code.
In chapters 12 to 15 St Paul deals with specifics of Christian behaviour. This ethic differs
from that of the Old Testament in that it addresses both individuals living in an alien
environment, and the small gathered Church community. The Old Testament had
addressed the whole nation as a society in relationship to Yahweh – „holy‟ and called by
his name. The group to whom St Paul writes is living in a hostile state with no cultural
support for the faith, and with many points of conflict with Christian values. This
especially colours his ethic with regard to the state, in chapter 13.
This ethic also differs from the ethic of the Old Testament in that it does not offer an
external holiness code. Instead it has these elements.
What is ‘good’ is God’s will, not written on stone, but in the heart. It is
discerned by submission. Being surrendered to God‟s will is our Motivation and leads
to Knowledge of his will and understanding of his purpose. Romans 12:1-3 Therefore,
I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices,
holy and pleasing to God--this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any
longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.
Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good,
pleasing and perfect will.
The believer is not an isolated Christian; we are to be plugged into the
fellowship. This faith of ours is a team game and each needs to be a team player.
Romans 12:3-8 For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of
yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober
judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you. Just as each
of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the
same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member
belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If
a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let
him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it
is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let
him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.
The Life of the Spirit within, needs to be expressed in Actions and attitudes
which are Christ-like.
This will affect our attitude and relationship with society
This will affect our attitude and relationship with the State.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
99
The most extensive passage in the New Testament dealing with the Christian and the
State, is found in Romans 12. Government is God‟s will and the State has a delegated
authority.
Our main motivations are to be Love and our eschatological Hope.
Romans 13:8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one
another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. :11 And do this,
understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your
slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed.
Judgment of moral actions should be on the basis of Conscience, which has
been educated by the Holy Spirit.
Moral decisions should be made through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, who
will teach us through the example of Jesus, and the relationship within the
Christian fellowship.
Romans 15:3-4 For even Christ did not please himself but, as it is written: ‘The
insults of those who insult you have fallen on me.’ For everything that was written in
the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement
of the Scriptures we might have hope. Romans 15:14 I myself am convinced, my
brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, complete in knowledge and
competent to instruct one another.
St Paul’s Conclusion. St Paul has given us the dignity of an ethic, where we are
treated as children and not slaves. As part of the family of God we are called to
relationship and a way of living that brings glory to the Father. But it is also a way of
living that brings the possibility of glory to us as we are treated as moral adults, with the
ability to discern the will of God, as we keep in relationship with God.
In none of this did Paul provide a timeless moral code and simply demand
obedience to it. Rather he brought the gospel to bear upon the particular question
of specific congregations and resources they had for dealing with them. He
addressed the communities as being capable of the discernment called for.220
The law gives direction, but it cannot condemn and we are no longer under its curse.
The gospel of grace releases us from the guilt of failure and opens new
possibilities for a new effort. Moreover it offers a new relationship with the
Commander. He who pointed us to the design for living at Mount Sinai, embraces
us with love at Mount Calvary. What God expects of ordinary people is obedience
born of gratitude, what God gives ordinary people is forgiveness born of grace.
Once forgiven, we hear his commands, not as a burden, but as an invitation to
enjoy our humanity, and in our joy, to glorify our Creator.221
220 A D Verhey, New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology, Inter Varsity
Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 1995, page 62
221 Lewis B Smedes, Mere Morality, Erdmans, Grand Rapids, 1983, page 243
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
100
His writing of The Triumph of the Cross
The form of the book is not a sonnet such as Petrarch would have produced, but one
which was entirely new for the period. It is filled with great analytical reasoning and
closely argued syllogisms. His apologetic is a complete exposition of the Christian Faith
but without the trappings of scholasticism which had been fundamental to all other
theological works of the time. The scholastic method had been used to confine the truth
of the Faith as an exclusive possession of the clergy. But Savonarola throws this idea to
one side in his desire to reach the ordinary believers and seekers after truth. He even
takes the time to translate and re-write the whole work into Italian with the hope that it
would be more accessible to all who had a basic education.
The work is divided into four „books’ and a prologue, which states his apologetic purpose,
his presuppositions and his method of working.
When one takes into account the circumstances and pressures upon Savonarola at the
time of writing, then it is a remarkable achievement. The circumstances also give
evidence for the multi purposes that motivated the writing. There is the desire to bring
people to Christ and to see them converted and growing in their faith, and there is the
desire to provide a full apologetic and exposition of the Christian Faith and lastly there
was the intention that this should be an apologetic for Savonarola himself – proving that
he was not a heretic.
In fact, the Pope never disputed a single belief or doctrine expressed by the Prior. The
cardinals who were consulted by the Pope examined the work carefully and found it was
without a flaw.
15 Savonarola’s Schema
It is instructive to see the schema that Savonarola uses to support his holistic
Apologetic. This schema is pictured in the motif of Christ in Triumph. But first, we should
note that his motivation is evangelistic – to bring people to trust Christ. The Authority for
his argument is reason alone. His Presuppositions are that, Empirical and Rational
processes allow a meaningful observation of the Creation, the nature of man and of the
works of Christ.
Fundamental and undeniable truths.
Christ is universally accepted as an historical figure who was crucified, and he
is worshipped by a major part of all nations
This Christian worship includes belief in the Trinity and the Sacraments.
The foundation for the Church is significant because it is not what one would
expect. Weak fishermen in a remote region were chosen to change the world
through an executed rabbi.
That the Church grew in the face of persecution and fierce attack, is
significant.
The evidence of existence and creation shows there is a God.
Our experience of the world shows evidence of a Prime Mover
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
101
Our experience of the world shows evidence of contingency and an Effective
First Cause
Our experience of the world shows evidence of gradation and therefore there
must be the highest form of perfection – a supreme being
Our experience of the world shows evidence of an intelligent creator
Our experience of humanity is that there is an 'in built' desire to worship.
The God that is deduced from the evidence – is ONE God.
Holy Christian living is evidence that this ONE God is the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ. The intrinsic effects of faith are evidence that its source is
God.
Christian living is an experience additional to outward worship
Christian living is not fruit of self effort
Christian living is holy – therefore not caused by evil
Christian living is moral – therefore not based on lies and un-truth
Christian living has a focus in Christ as its power
Christian living is in harmony with the God of truth as prime mover
The Gospel of Christ is true because it is the source of the Christian life.
Christ is not only the source of the Christian Life – he is its goal.
The fruit of the Spirit is the fruit of the Spirit of God.
The experience of Christians is of the grace of God.
Christianity is marked by the speed at which personal transformation takes
place and the quality of the Christ-like character that is produced.
No other religion or philosophy can produce such transforming power.
Christian living has been tested in the heat of persecution
The Scriptures testify that this ONE God is the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, and that he is the author of Scripture.
Scripture affirms God by prophecy.
Scripture affirms God in its unity and harmony
Scripture affirms God by its power
Scripture affirms God by its truth
The Exterior effects of faith are evidence that its source is the God and Father
of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The worship of Christ is so widespread that it is a phenomenon needing
explanation.
- The good effects of the sacraments would not be produced unless they
were from God.
- The results of the sacraments are not psychologically induced.
The effects of faith on the inward life are evidence that its source is the God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The chief effect of faith in Christ is peace and joy in spirit and soul.
Faith in Christ has supernatural power, seen when it is experienced by those
who endure pain, persecution or torture.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
102
This peace is based in truth. It leads to renouncing the pleasures and wealth
of this world for the discernment and spiritual sensitivity found in following
Christ.
The source of peace is Christ and his converting power is released in those
who love and trust him.
The Works of Christ are evidence that He is divine and ONE with God the
Father.
Seen in the power of his works and their miraculous results
Seen in the wisdom of his works and effectiveness of his teaching.
Seen in the truth of his teaching
Seen in the goodness of his works
Seen in the grace of his passion
God is beyond full human comprehension, so some aspects of his nature are
only known by divine revelation. He has made such revelation because he
wants men to come to salvation and trust in him. The things revealed are
summed up in the Creed.
There is one God, who is Trinity in unity.
He is the Creator and Lord of History
He is saviour and offers salvation from sin, through grace
He promises a future hope of eternal life
The Atonement, Incarnation and Virgin birth are essential in satisfying the
holiness, justice, mercy and love of God, in relation to mankind.
The Commands of the Christian faith demand a holiness that reveals the
holiness and standards of God.
The Decalogue demands love and honour for God
The Decalogue demands love and honour for one’s neighbour
Its demands cannot be met without supernatural grace.
It is the basis for the moral teaching of the Church
It underlies the judicial law of the Church
The Ceremonies and Sacraments of the Church are instituted by Christ to match
the needs of mankind.
They represent Christ
They are a means of receiving his grace, but not the source of grace.
They are Christ’s means of ordering his Church
They are Christ’s means of being present with his people – the body of Christ.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
103
The Christian Worldview is the only rational Worldview, because Christianity is
Uniquely True.
Human Philosophies fail to explain the purpose of life or the true nature of
man.
Astrology is futile, irrational and false.
Polytheistic Religions are evil and they usurp the honour due to God.
Judaism is condemned by its own Scriptures for rejecting the Messiah
Christian Heresies and Cults are often immoral and damage the unity of the
Church by rejecting the teaching of the Scriptures and the Church
Islam offers no certain salvation because it rejects the divinity of Christ and
his atonement.
Conclusion
Christianity is Reasonable and has a Solid Foundation
Other world views do not have such Solid Foundation
It would be unreasonable not to act on the evidence and commit to Christ
16 Savonarola’s Propositions and Proof
I now want to examine in more detail, the Propositions he promotes and the Proofs he
offers. I have already looked at his arguments concerning the Gospel and Salvation. See
page 99. This is a major issue because it relates directly to Savonarola‟s stated
motivation in writing. (see below) But now I will undertake a general overview but with a
closer look at two of his arguments; the truth about the nature of Christ and his analysis
of Judaism. The reason for looking in more detail at these two topics is to provide an
example of his incisive logic and mastery of Scripture.
Motivation. Savonarola begins by stating his motive is evangelistic. His desire is not to
win an argument or to gain a following, but to see people come to faith in Christ. This is
the only valid motivation for Apologetics.
there are men living today in such bondage to sin, that, even in the light of the
noonday sun, they grope in darkness, and scorn the marvels of heavenly science.
I am, therefore, on fire with zeal for the House of God222, and concerned
for the salvation of these misguided men.223
Presuppositions. There needs to be some agreed basis on which any meaningful
argument can be built. Savonarola asks his readers to agree that –
Empirical Knowledge is valid data for rational discussion.
222 Psalm 69:9 - for zeal for your house consumes me, and the insults of those who insult you fall
on me.
223 TOTC – Page 81
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
104
Empirical and Rational processes allow a meaningful observation of the Creation,
and of the works of Christ. They also provide a means of evaluating the evidence
provided by such observation.
This is a proper thing to do. Scripture says we can discover truths about the invisible
God by examining what is visible and has been revealed. Reasoning is a gift given to
humanity in creation – a natural virtue and good to use.
Again, it is universally agreed, that the peculiar and highest activity of man is
understanding and reasoning. And man is the principle agent of this activity. As
man is composed of matter and an intelligent mind, we cannot say that he is
capable of reasoning by virtue of the matter of which he is composed, but solely
by virtue of his mind. Consequently, as this mind is nothing but the intelligent
soul, it is the intelligent soul which is the essence of man. 224
Such evidences confirm us in our Faith, and prove to our adversaries that our
believing is not mindless, but thoughtful and with intellectual rigour.225
Fundamental and undeniable truths. Having agreed the presuppositions involved in
evaluating the evidence, he now presents the most basic truths that should be accepted
and upon which the argument will be built. The things, which are significant and need to
be explained, are –
Christ is universally accepted as an historical figure who was crucified, and he is
worshipped by a major part of all nations.
Not only is there the evidence for the Faith of Christ observable in his day, but there is
the evidence of a long historic root going back over thousands of years and shaping
history. The Jews and Old Testament prophesied and expected a Messiah (Christ).
Following the New Testament period, the Jews and Muslims accepted the person of
Jesus, though rejecting his claims.
This Christian worship includes belief in the Trinity and the Sacraments.
The foundation for the Church is significant because it is not what one would
expect. Weak fishermen in a remote region were chosen to change the world
through an executed rabbi.
On a human level we would not have given much chance of the enterprise of Christ‟s
mission being successful as we look at its beginnings. But it is even more interesting to
look at the evidence as Savonarola does and ask, „What is the cause of all the signs and
expressions of Christianity we see?‟ Then there is surprise to find that the first cause is a
tiny group of Galilean fishermen and their rabbi. Especially when one sees the harsh
persecutions which were suffered, became moments of growth and not retreat.
That the Church grew in the face of persecution and fierce attack, is significant.
Challenge and Rebuttal of fundamental Truths. The challenge is - If Christ is so
224 TOTC – Page 99
225 TOTC – Page 83
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
105
important, why do so few pagan writers celebrate him? His answer is that – Some did.
Of those who did, some were converted and died as martyrs for Christ. But many did not
speak of Christ because God chose not to use them because their paganism made them
unfit means of communication. The person of Christ is Truth and their handling of truth
issues was unreliable. The person of Christ is Holy and their immoral attitudes would
have made them unsuitable communicators. Their motivation was always to bring glory
to themselves so they were unsuitable to write about the glory of Christ. Their
intellectual blindness and hardness of heart meant they dismissed the miracles of Christ
without really examining the evidence. Their hatred of Christianity meant they would not
wish to give testimony to Christ. Their subsistence was provided by patronage and so
they wrote what would win friends and gain wealth. They had little interest in extolling a
poor crucified Galilean who seemed to only offer poverty and suffering.
The Mode in which the Argument is conducted.
Natural Revelation and Reason can establish the existence of a God who is unity
and simplicity of being.
Human (natural) Reason cannot deduce everything, because it is human and has
limitations.
Divine Revelation speaks of things beyond Natural Revelation, such as the Trinity
and the Incarnation.
Natural Revelation (what is revealed in nature and creation) precedes Divine or
Special Revelation – therefore the argument will begin with Natural Revelation
and the evidences found in nature. Then it will move to consider the evidences of
effects which have a divine explanation.
The evidence of existence and creation shows there is a God. He defines God as
the highest good, the supreme truth, the first cause, the prime mover – the highest
being. (Savonarola wants to point to the commonly held consensus regarding the Five
Ways of Aquinas, in which Aquinas uses the philosophy of Aristotle to affirm God as a
First Cause or Prime Mover. Because these ideas were commonly held he feels free to
refer to them briefly. His reference is partly to show that belief in God is reasonable and
partly to show that his approach to the evidence he will be examining is parallel and
equally valid.)
The evidence for God includes –
A Prime Mover is required to explain existence.
A First Cause is required to explain creation.
A Supreme Truth is required to explain ultimate truth and perfection.
An Intelligent Designer is required to explain the complexity and interdependence
of nature.
A Supreme Being is required to explain the natural urge in all people, to offer
worship.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
106
The God that is deduced from the evidence – is ONE God.
To deal with the question of many possible gods, he uses the Ontological argument of
Anselm. That than which no greater can be thought. From this he deduces that
logically God must be one, because for there to be several gods would indicate a greater
among them unless they were all equal in every way, and if that were possible one
would still need to be the first cause. This one God would be ALL perfect and an Effective
(intelligent) first cause.
God is Spirit. He does not need a body nor is He dependent upon other bodies or beings,
but is self contained and self sufficient. He is consistent because he is immutable and
pure act. He is perfect and Supreme Good. He is Infinite in Power. He is ubiquitous -
omnipresent. He is eternal. God is One in Unity. He is omniscient – and knows all things
perfectly. He acts from Free Will and without constraints. He acts with humanity in ways
that recognise the gift of Free Will with which He has ennobled man by creating him in
His image. He is the creator. He rules and governs all creation with providential care.
God is Love and is personal with the ability of self-disclosure. He is purposeful and has a
reason for the creation of humankind.
The method for evaluating the evidence for a relationship between God and
mankind and the place of Christ.
At the start of Book Two, Savonarola explains that he will establish the truth of the
Christian Faith by using natural reasoning to examine the works of Christ and the good
deeds of Christians. Both are open to investigation and are of significance and need
some explanation for their existence. He says -
We will demonstrate the truth of the Faith of Christ: first, by arguments founded
on the Christian life; secondly, by others based on the cause of this life; and
thirdly, by those drawn from the effects of this life. This chain of reasoning will
embrace almost everything that is at present taking place within the Church
militant.226
Holy Christian living is evidence that its source is God the Father and his son
Jesus Christ.
Man is the noblest of God‟s creation because he is made in God‟s image, has been given
free will and has a purpose. The purpose is to glorify God in this world and to share
intimacy with God in the next. Therefore the soul of man is immortal. Man is capable of
meaningful relationship with God and with other men. This is possible because of God‟s
self disclosure and man‟s rational understanding; though this understanding is limited
and imperfect. Man can know happiness as well as other emotions including negative
ones, such as sorrow. Man is morally accountable and capable of great good and great
evil. Because of his special nature, in his heart man has a sense of eternal issues. Man
226 TOTC – Page 101
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
107
has intelligence and rational powers. Man is a psychosomatic being.
Every effect turns naturally to its cause; submits itself to its cause, in order to
become like it; and, in a certain sense, invokes the protection of its cause. By
acting in this way, the effect is paying honour and worship to its cause. Now, as
man is the effect of God, there must be in his nature an instinct prompting him to
turn to God, to become subject to Him, to resemble Him, and to invoke Him, in
order to obtain from Him beatitude.227
Therefore worship is natural and instinctive as well as a response to divine revelation.
Worship involves total response from man by engaging his mind, will and emotions and
affecting his character and conduct.
The worship of Christ is so widespread that it is a phenomenon needing
explanation.
This evidence is expressed in Christian worship, writings and monuments, and
sacraments.
Further witness to this conviction is found in the books written in every language
and published throughout the world. There is also evidence in the ruins of
Christian churches to be found in every land. These are proof positive that there
is not a spot on the face of the earth where Christ has not been worshipped, or is
not still adored, or where there is at least some knowledge of Christianity. That is
why even unbelievers speak of Christ as the God of the Christians. 228
The Eucharist or Communion may be used to represent the sacramental aspect of
worship. The results of the sacraments are not psychologically induced. Their effects lead
to spiritual and physical well-being. If God were not involved then sacraments would be
lies – but then they would not have good results. Because they point to truth and are
from God, we can conclude that organised worship is the outcome, not of a human, but
of a divine Spirit.
Only God’s goodness and truth that can produce an effect so excellent as to give
birth to the Christian life, and to nourish and perfect it. Because this life is wholly
of God’s Spirit, it cannot be explained by any physical power. 229
Christian living is in addition to outward worship.
The evidence does not just consist in outward ceremonial, but in the holiness of life and
inward devotion of the true Christians. Those who evidence the most holiness are firmest
in admitting that Christ is the cause and that the only progress made is when he is
acknowledged as Lord. Their behaviour is not the cause of their faith, but the effect and
that faith is a gift.
227 TOTC – Page 101
228 TOTC – Page 86
229 TOTC – Page 113
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
108
All secondary causes are instruments of a primary cause. Therefore Christ, the
man who was crucified, is the instrument whereby God chooses to produce that
wonderful effect - the Christian life. 230
Again, God has a method in His proceedings. His wisdom governs inferior things
by those that are superior to them. And since the cause is always more perfect
than the effect, He has ordained noblest causes for the noblest effects, As there is
not in the world a more noble effect than the Christian life, it follows that the
cause from which it springs must be the noblest possible. Since the Christian life
is an effect of the Faith of Christ, we must acknowledge that, that Faith, far from
being a fable, is the noble cause of a noble effect.
Christian living is not the result of self effort.
It requires purity of heart, but means more than natural goodness or moral living.
Because man is not able to reach such a requirement, it must be the fruit of divine
grace. There is the evidence of good Christian lives – but the explanation is not self
effort.
the perfect Christian life, is not the result of natural love, nor is it the creation
neither of the imagination nor even of reason; that it is not influenced by
astrology nor by any angel or demon; but that it comes from the grace of God,
supernaturally poured into the soul. 231
Christian living is holy – therefore not caused by evil.
The evidence is that the Christian life of worship is the highest form of life possible. It is
the most altruistic, the most rational and reasonable and the most pure. It has the best
possible goal – knowing and sharing intimacy with God. Such intimacy promises the
completion of our knowledge, fulfilment and contentment.
He notes that this witness of Christ in his people is a more effective means of evangelism
than philosophy or miracles. (This is a great lesson for those who feel that if God would
only throw in a few more signs and wonders then we could tip the balance in evangelism
in his favour.)
As we know that every effect expresses its cause. The beautiful and revered
appearance of holy Christians can only come from the beauty of their soul. This
attitude and appearance is often effective in bringing sinners to conversion. Even
though a man be uneducated, if he leads a holy life, his witness will have more
influence with his friends than would an eloquent and learned philosopher. More
even than by demonstration of or talk of miracles. 232
Christian living is moral – therefore not based on lies or untruth.
Lack of Morality does not cause holy living – it destroys it. Christian living has a focus
230 TOTC – Page 108
231 TOTC – Page 106
232 TOTC – Page 119
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
109
in Christ as its power and cause. If there were inconsistency then Christians would have
spotted it long ago. Yet their evidence is that the more they trust the truth of Christ –
the more they are called and empowered to live a holy life. Christian living is in harmony
with the God of truth as prime mover and cause. God is the prime mover in the spiritual
realm and he moves human intelligence with a desire for truth and not away from it.
Christian living has a focus in Christ as its source.
This source is in strong contrast to all other sources of influence in creation. No other
religion or psychology or philosophy is able to produce such transforming power.
Christianity is marked by the speed at which transformation takes place and the quality
of the Christ-like character that is produced.
Consequently every one must acknowledge that Christ, as God, is the principal
cause of human righteousness, and, as man, He is the one who makes it possible. 233
Christian living has been tested in the heat of persecution.
Christian living has been tested in the heat of persecution and the CAUSE has shown
itself to be superhuman in withstanding the tests. He is not only the source of the
Christian Life – he is its goal. The aim is to be made one with him who out of love for us,
was crucified to effect our salvation and wholeness.
The chief effect of faith in Christ is peace and joy in spirit and soul. The nature of this
peace is a sign that it is from God. It has supernatural power and is not from human
power. This is seen when it is experienced by those who experience pain, persecution or
torture. Non Christians can point to examples of courage, but not in such numbers and
not in such diversity – from little children to elderly saints.
This peace is based in truth. It leads to renouncing the pleasures and wealth of this
world for the discernment and spiritual sensitivity found in following Christ.
The more virtuously a man lives, the more clearly he discerns the truth, and the
more he loves good and hates evil. If Christianity were not true, then Christians
would live in error, and their persistence in adoring Christ as God, would be
criminal.234
The source of peace is Christ and his converting power is released in those who love and
trust him. The exterior evidence of the Christian shows a particular dignity and character
which is acknowledged as being in contrast to those who have no hope, no power and no
God. To illustrate this he gives several historic examples of the impact of holy living and
character.
This character even affects the bodily appearance and can be seen in the eyes and face
of those who have found the peace of Christ as opposed to those who have become
haggard through sin and show that „the wages of sin IS death’ – the effects already
being seen.
233 TOTC – Page 109
234 TOTC – Page 117
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
110
Christian living is a fruit of the Spirit of God.
What is seen in the Character of the Christian is the character of God, and is therefore a
supernatural creation.
This peace, joy, and freedom of soul cannot come from any natural human
power, weakened as we are by sensuality and ignorance. It must be a
supernatural gift of God, causing us to lift our eyes to the divine light and the
intimacy with God promised to us. We can prove that union with God is the cause
of this peace of soul, if we reason in the following manner. The soul is one, and
all its powers spring from its unity. If the soul is focussed on the activity of one
motivating power, then it cannot give attention to the activity of another. Just as
in intense contemplation the operations of the senses are suspended, and there is
less awareness of great physical pain or pleasure. Humanly speaking it would
seem quite impossible that the intellect should enjoy peace and happiness at
times of intense bodily torture. And, yet, we see this phenomenon in innumerable
martyrs, of both sexes and from every background. 235
It is this fruit of the Spirit which creates fellowship and society – as men and women
give care and rights to one another. Brian Hepplethwaite sees this as far-reaching -
The difference made by the gospel, in its direct and indirect penetration, is
discernible, according to this view, in the centuries of European (now Western)
cultural history. It is seen in respect for and care of the sick and the poor; the
emphasis on labour and responsibility, the recognition of equality, social justice,
universal education, universal franchise, freedom of religion, freedom of the
press, and democracy.236
Christian living’s experience of prayer shows the Christian Faith is true.
The holiest lives are marked by commitment to prayer and Christians have discovered
that Prayer leads to discernment of truth and enlightenment. They discover that prayer
made in the name of Jesus is answered, when what they ask is honouring to him.
Also note that Christians make great requests of God, asking in the name of
Christ crucified and through His merits. If Christ is not divine and they have no
basis for asking in His name, then God would surely point out their mistake and
lead them to the truth. If having been shown the truth, they continue to ask in
Christ’s name, their prayers would not be answered. But the reality is that the
chief prayer of a Christian is for grace to live a Christian life, and for joy and
peace of soul. This prayer, and more beside, are graciously answered in His
name, because He is divine and his word is true.237
235 TOTC – Page 116
236 Brian Hepplethwaite, In Defence of Christianity, Oxford University press, Oxford 2005 page
133
237 TOTC – Page 113
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
111
Prayer is motivated by God and leads men to the truth of salvation. It therefore centres
in Christ crucified.
A further argument is, that if Christ is not God, it would be blasphemy to believe
and to confess that He is one with the Father and the Holy Spirit, and to pray
pleading His death on our behalf. How could a good God leave Christians in such
blindness, especially when they are the best of mankind and always ready to cut
out any error that may dishonour God’s Majesty? It is absurd to say that God
leaves them in their wrong belief because they are obstinate about it. If this were
the case, why should He hear their blasphemous prayers? In fact why should He
not punish them severely?238
The Scriptures testify that this ONE God is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and that he is the author of Scripture.
The Scriptures provide evidence needing to be taken into account because reading and
meditation on Scriptures are the CAUSES of the Christian life, used by God to effect his
purpose. It is as if God‟s activity and character shine through and the author is known
through the writings.
The truth and authority of Scripture is affirmed by is prophetical content, which
meets the highest criteria.
Now many of the events foretold by the Prophets have come to pass; and the fact
of their fulfilment inspires us with confidence that any that have not yet been
accomplished will eventually be verified. We must, therefore, acknowledge the
Holy Scriptures to be, not a work of human ingenuity, but the revelation of God's
providence towards us. God alone has prescience of the future. Therefore, no
man, however diligent or wise, can order the wars and doings of kings and
princes, and the names and places, and different actions and circumstances of
men in such a way that they actually foreshadow things to come. 239
Why should he appeal to Prophecy? Because it was a test offered by God himself.
Isaiah 41:21-24 ‘Present your case,’ says the Lord. ‘Set forth your arguments,’
says Jacob's King. ‘Bring in your idols to tell us what is going to happen. declare
to us the things to come, tell us what the future holds, so we may know that you
are gods. Do something, whether good or bad, so that we will be dismayed and
filled with fear. But you are less than nothing and your works are utterly
worthless.
Isaiah says God has spoken and predicted the future; other claims to truth fail at this
point. The Bible is 27% prophecy, while the Qur‟an has none. Neither does it feature
strongly in other religions.
He explains that fulfilled prophecy can be publicly checked and is useful evidence. But it
238 TOTC – Page 113
239 TOTC – Pages 107-108
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
112
needs to meet certain criteria - It must be possible for people to check the details. It
needs to be a clear prediction and clear fulfilment, not fulfilled by those with vested
interests and not written after the event! Fulfilled prophecy has the benefit of showing
not just a First Cause but a God who speaks.
Scripture is also affirmed by its harmony and unity indicating the work of one
mind.
Its quality and language is unique. God uses Scripture to teach, correct, convert and
sustain and the Church Fathers and martyrs are testimony to this The Scriptures have a
track record of bringing illumination and understanding, but also of changing lives in
conversions – something philosophy fails to do. Savonarola notes that he has seen this
in his own preaching. Scriptural truths are affirmed by the harmony and truth of the
external world. Because it is based in truth, Scripture refutes all other philosophies and
religions.
When we take into account the differences of times and circumstances, of
language and of authors, the extraordinary uniformity which exists between the
Old and the New Testaments would not be possible, were they not the work of
one mind. A mind that knows all that has taken place at all times. This uniformity
cannot be explained by pure chance, since there is no discord or lack of harmony
between the two Testaments, but perfect agreement between them, even in the
smallest particulars. What is obscure in one passage is explained in another; and
the Scripture interprets itself. Although those who have not studied the Bible may
be ignorant of this fact, the truth of what I say will be acknowledged by all who
examine Holy Scripture with faith, humility and purity of heart.240
Scripture is affirmed by those whose characters have been morally changed.
They claim a power in the Scriptures, to such an extent that even when persecuted, they
use them in worship and for spiritual support.
Christians would be the first to discern if the Bible were not the work of God.
However, far from denying the divine inspiration of the Scriptures, the Fathers of
the Church have left many volumes extolling its teaching. They have also written
and preached that it is unlawful to alter one iota of the sacred text. Some of them
have even shed their blood, in defence of the divine origin of the Bible. If these
men had not been certain that the Scriptures were the work of God, they would
have definitely not have sacrificed their lives for such a belief. 241
The Scriptures have a track record of bringing illumination and understanding, but also
of changing lives in conversions – something philosophy fails to do. Savonarola notes
that he has seen this in his own preaching.
I also speak from personal experience. At one time (in order to demonstrate the
240 TOTC – Page 110
241 TOTC – Page 111
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
113
profundity of Holy Scripture to pretentious people242 who possessed only
superficial knowledge) my preaching centred on subtle points of philosophy. I
found that the people who heard me were left daydreaming. But as soon as I
devoted myself to the exposition of the Bible, I found all eyes were riveted upon
me. My audience were so focussed on my words, that they might have been
carved out of stone. I also found that when I put theological questions to one side,
and confined myself to explaining Holy Scripture, my hearers were enlightened
and my preaching resulted in the conversion of men to Christ and to transformed
lives. 243
Scripture affirms God by its truth.
The truth of Scripture has a power to destroy the lies and deceit of the Occult so
prevalent in his day. And because the Scriptures are based in truth then there should be
no fear of science, but rather a desire to study and discern more and more Truth.
Again, truth can never contradict truth. Truth must be in harmony with truth, but
always at war with falsehood. Now, as every science agrees with Holy Scripture,
it is evident that it must contain, not falsehood, but truth. The leaders in every
branch of science have proved that no true science is repugnant to Holy
Scripture. Therefore, Christians are not forbidden to study any science, except
divination and similar superstitions, which are derided by all true scientists..244
The Works of Christ are evidence that HE is divine and ONE with the Father.
Working up to a climax, he introduces the person and work of Christ. Here he affirms
that the works and the power demonstrated in the person of Christ can only be
accounted for by the presence of God working with him.
Then he introduces an argument using the logical analysis of Aristotle as he considers
how it could be that Christ could have such power and influence – and claim to be God.
Let us approach the issue in this way - either Christ is the true God and the First
Cause of all things, or He is not. If He is God, it follows that Christianity is true;
and there is no need for further discussion. If He is not God, He must have been
the proudest man, and the greatest liar that ever lived. He must also have been
exceedingly foolish. For it would have been the height of folly for a man, unaided
by wealth or worldly power, ignorant of philosophy and of rhetoric, to attempt,
merely by virtue of his death, to fight against almighty God, and to usurp the
honour due to God for himself. If He was not God then it would also be a stupid
idea to try to convince learned and powerful men that they should acknowledge
Him as God and join a new religion that should change the whole world. It would
242 Sciolists - amateurs who engage in an activity without serious intentions and who pretend to have knowledge. Of Latin origin meaning a smattering of knowledge.
243 TOTC – Page 111
244 TOTC – Page 111
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
114
also be folly to inspire his followers with such fervent love for Him, that for his
sake they should be ready to lay down their lives for Him. Could any absurdity
equal such aspirations as these?
If Jesus of Nazareth was not true God, then He was a most foolish and
blasphemous seducer.245
The options open are three – he was either who he said he was, or he was bad, or mad.
Each option is examined and only one found to be worthy of being consistent with the
evidence. Christ is proven to be God by his sanity, goodness and powerful works.
Seen in the power of his works and miraculous results
The power of a crucified Galilean is extraordinary - turning the world upside down by
miracles of changed lives, by fulfilling prophecy, by building a worshipping community of
followers willing to lay down their lives for him.
When we consider the power of Christ, by which He has overcome all gods,
emperors, tyrants, philosophers, heretics, and barbarous nations. When we
remember how His work has been accomplished - not by the sword, nor by
wealth, nor by human wisdom, but by the daily torture and death of His martyrs.
When we think of His divine wisdom which has spread so quickly, enlightening the
world and cleansing it of its errors. When we reflect upon His mercy, which has
powerfully attracted multitudes to His love so, that not only have they renounced
all earthly possessions, but have gladly suffered martyrdom rather than deny one
‘jot or tittle’ of the faith - Can we be hesitant about the truth of Christianity?
What god, or what man, has performed similar wonders? If these marvellous
works have been performed without a miracle; this itself would be the greatest of
miracles! But if they have been worked through miracles, these miracles prove
that Christianity is from God. 246
Seen in the wisdom of his works and effectiveness of his teaching.
Even if Christianity were false, we should still have to recognise the
extraordinary intellectual gifts of its founder, who has been able to lead His
Disciples to sublime holiness of life, by means of subtle lies! But, as there is
no harmony between virtue and deceit, and no agreement between truth
and falsehood, we are forced to confess that Christ is truly wise. He has a
wisdom surpassing that of men. His wisdom is established by the many who
have honoured it, not only in their words and writing, but also by their
works, and even by the shedding of their blood. 247
Seen in the truth of his teaching
245 TOTC – Page 121
246 TOTC – page 198
247 TOTC – Page 126
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
115
But, supposing that the Apostles worked no miracles at all, surely the wonder of
wonders would be that a crucified man should be able, just by the words of
twelve poor fishermen, to persuade the entire world to embrace His doctrine.
Therefore, whether the spread of Christianity is due to miracles or not, we cannot
deny that the power of Christ has been beyond any natural power. And, since the
First Cause is that which is more powerful than other causes, so the true God must
be He that is mightier than any other god. Therefore, Jesus Christ, whose Faith
has been victorious over all other forms of religion, must be the true God, and His
teaching must be the true religion.248
Seen in the goodness of his works
Goodness has a way of making its presence known, and Christ has made His
goodness known through the unique graces and blessings He made available to
all people. His coming has driven our error from the world and filled it with
holiness and virtue. He has given to all His followers a quality of joy, which no
earthly thing could give. His supreme goodness is also seen in His readiness to
forgive sinners and His generosity in enriching them with His gifts. So that ‘where
sin abounded, grace did much more abound.’ Those who turn to him from their
sins are enabled to lead a holy life and enjoy true peace and happiness, whereas
those who forsake Him lose all tranquillity of spirit. What further proof do we
require that Christ is the Supreme Good, and the Ultimate End of man? 249
Seen in the grace of his passion
He has wholly given Himself to the human race, to embrace it, and draw it to His
love. But, above all His other attributes, His mercy is shown; because it has led
Him to be crucified out of love for us. His justice also is seen in that He has
Himself made satisfaction for original sin. 250
The Creed is the distilled truth of God’s revelation.
Lorenzo Valla, had applied the techniques of textual criticism to the Creeds and many
were shaken to discover from him that the Apostles had not composed the Apostles‟
Creed. Savonarola reaffirms the Creed as a rational and Biblical formula.
He recognises that God is beyond full human comprehension, so we should note the
limitations of reason when discussing and defining God. Reason has shown how little we
know and that reason itself has limitations. As Peter Kreeft observed -
Reason's last step is the recognition that there are an infinite number of things
which are beyond it.251
248 TOTC – Page 125
249 TOTC – Page 131
250 TOTC – Page 73
251 Peter Kreeft, Christianity for Modern Pagans: Pascal's Pensees Edited, Outlined and Explained , Ignatius Press, 1993 page 238
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
116
Therefore some aspects of God‟s nature are only known by divine revelation. He has
made such revelation because he wants men to come to salvation and trust in him. The
things revealed are summed up in the Creed.
There is one God, who is Trinity in unity.
He is the Creator and Lord of History
He is saviour and offers salvation from sin, through grace
He promises a future hope of eternal life
The Atonement, Incarnation and Virgin birth are essential in satisfying the
holiness, justice, mercy and love of God, in relation to mankind.
The Commands of the Christian faith demand a holiness that reveals the
holiness and standards of God.
God revealed them to those whom he had redeemed from Egypt. They were not the
means of earning his love and acceptance. He had already demonstrated his love and
grace, and as a response, they were expected to behave in ways which reflected his
ideal.
Deut. 10:12 And now, O Israel, what does the Lord your God ask of you but to
fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the Lord
your God with all your heart and with all your soul,
As far as humans are concerned the idea of „righteousness’ is rooted in the purpose of
creation, with humans brought into a living relationship with God – as a part of his
household.
It is within this family unit that the ‘law’ of God forms the house rules, the norm
according to which the behaviour of Israel is to be measured.252
These are Ten Commandments not ten suggestions.
The Decalogue demands love and honour for God
The moral standard of God is an absolute and an ideal. As Lewis Smedes explains -
When we see the Ten Commandments and particularly the first expectation that
we will love God with heart and soul and mind in totality, we recognise our
failure. We as Christians are called not to throw away the commands, but to
affirm that the God who demands is the God who forgives. In fact the gospel of
grace releases us from the guilt of failure and opens a new relationship with God.
The one who pointed out his design for living at Mount Sinai is the same God who
embraces us with his love at Mount Calvary where Jesus died for us. What God
expects of ordinary people is obedience born of gratitude, what God gives
ordinary people is forgiveness and grace.253
252 D B Garlington, New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology, Inter Varsity
Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 1995, page 743
253 Lewis Smedes, p 243 Mere Morality, published by Erdmans, Grand Rapids. Reprinted 1996.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
117
Savonarola‟s purpose is not to use the Decalogue for exhortation, but to show that the
teaching it contains is rational and reveals a moral and rational God.
The Decalogue demands love and honour for one’s neighbour.
The rational nature of the Decalogue is seen in the way many nations have adopted it as
the basis for their laws and moral assumptions. Dr John Warwick Montgomery has shown
how the European Convention on Human Rights has its foundation in the Judeo-Christian
ethical demands for love of one‟s neighbour. These include impartiality of any tribunal, a
fair hearing, a speedy trial, confrontation of witnesses, the just and the unjust stand
equally before the court; all races, both sexes, all conditions, are treated equally. There
are basic human rights of right to life, right to family life, a right not to be subjected to
inhuman or degrading treatment, punishment and torture, freedom of thought,
conscience, religion, expression, assembly, association, movement. Social and economic
rights in general; the right to work and fair remuneration, right to protection of honour
and personal reputation, right to leisure time, and right asylum.
Its demands cannot be met without supernatural grace.
We must not think that these commandments mean that to love God and our
neighbour from natural virtue or inclination, is sufficient to gain salvation. Our
love must come from supernatural grace, which we should prepare ourselves to
receive. 254
It is the basis for the moral teaching of the Church
In addition to the Decalogue providing a moral framework for society, it also provides a
basis for the moral teaching of the Church in the form of an Absolute Moral Law. Norman
Geisler says that the Absolute Moral Law is –
A Universal duty that is universally binding on all men, at all times and in all
places. This moral law is not above God, but given by God. It is God’s good
nature which is the moral standard.255
Savonarola says –
Surely nothing can be conceived as more reasonable than these two
commandments. On them depend all other laws, both human and divine.
Therefore Christians regard everything they command or imply, or results from
them, as sacred and unbreakable. Any attack as on them as false or wrong is
clearly impious and of the devil.256
It underlies the judicial law of the Church
From these universal laws are deduced, (either by conclusion or by specially
formulated axioms), all particular laws. The particular laws, derived from the
254 TOTC – Page 151
255 Norman L Geisler, Christian Ethics – Options and Issues, Baker Book House in 1990.
256 TOTC – Page 152
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
118
Divine Law, are called Canonical Laws. Those deduced from natural law are
termed Civil Laws. The laity are governed by Civil, and the clergy by Canonical
Law. There is no opposition between the Divine and the natural law. But, as grace
perfects nature, the Divine Law perfects the natural law; and all that relates to
the Natural law relates, likewise, to the Divine Law.257
The Ceremonies and Sacraments of the Church are instituted by Christ to match
the needs of mankind.
Primary and Secondary Truths. Before examining his teaching on the Ceremonies of
the Church it is important to recognise the difference between what we may call Primary
and Secondary Christian Truths. The Primary Truths, which Christians hold as non-
negotiable, are those defined in the Nicene Creed, along with a recognition of the
Authority of Scripture, and a Personal Relationship with Christ as Saviour and Lord. The
Secondary Truths are those which are held in particular traditions of Christianity. They
consist of areas outside of the Primary Truths and are open to disagreement and
variation in interpretation. These occupy a very small proportion of the whole work and
relate to the Roman Catholic practises of his day. These include such issues as the
authority of the Pope, the number of the sacraments, the use of images in worship, etc.
Savonarola may have included these references to make his writing more acceptable to
the prelates of his day. However as they are clearly Secondary Truths compared with his
major Apologetic themes, I have given them no further comment.
They represent Christ
They are composed of external signs and of words, which represent Christ, the
Word of the Eternal Father, who was united to human nature.258
They are a means of receiving his grace, but not the source of grace.
And, since none can be saved without grace, we can truly say, that these
sacraments are Christ's instruments for granting grace. We do not mean, that the
sacrament’s power is able to produce the final effect of grace. We speak in the
sense used by philosophers, when they say that man is created of man and of the
sun's heat; not meaning that either human or solar power is capable of producing
the intellectual soul of man.
In the same way, the sacraments are not the source of grace. Grace does not
come from either the sacrament’s own innate virtue, not by power acquired from
the actions of Christ. Grace comes from God alone; but the sacraments open up
the soul to receive His grace. 259
257 TOTC – Page 156
258 TOTC – Page 157
259 TOTC – Pages 156-157
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
119
They are Christ’s means of ordering his Church
They are Christ’s means of being present with his people – the body of
Christ.
They match the needs of the Christian and Christian community
Savonarola presents seven sacraments as matching the needs of physical life – from
birth to development , growth, and eventual maturity.
So the vegetative life possesses powers of generation, of growth, and of nutrition.
In the animal kingdom, sickness may attack this new life, but nature provides
suitable remedies. And as new life cannot occur without a parent, some life giving
power must exist in the world. Sacraments in the spiritual life, correspond to the
way these physical needs are met. 260
These sacraments are, Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Communion, Penance, Extreme
Unction,261 Holy Orders, and Matrimony
Christ has ordained seven sacraments to be the means of nurturing and ruling the
spiritual life. We see, then, how wisely, and how advisedly, Christ has instituted
seven Sacraments in His Church.262
His Christian Worldview and His Analysis of Alternative Worldviews
The Christian Worldview is the only rational Worldview, because
Christianity is Uniquely True.
Just as Savonarola was ahead of his time in formulating an holistic Apologetic, and in
clearly defining the purpose of Apologetics – before the word Apologetics had been
coined to describe this enterprise. So he is much ahead of his time in using Worldviews
as part of his Apologetics. It was not until 1868 that the term Weltanschauung – a
Worldview, was first used in German, from Welt world and Anschauung view. By
examining the other Worldviews he shows Christianity to be the only one that has real
integrity and is therefore the true Faith.
What is a Worldview?
Savonarola recognised that a Worldview is a set of basic presuppositions, which people
hold about the make up of their world. He saw this as deeper than the study of world
religions, because it involves a person‟s core beliefs, which in turn informs their religion,
their doctrines and their behaviour. It is a way a person views or interprets all of reality.
260 TOTC – Page 158
261 Anointing with Oil. James 5:14 - Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church
to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord.
262 TOTC – Page 158
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
120
James Sire, in The Universe Next Door 263 has proposed seven basic questions as the
means of analysing and evaluating differing Worldviews. They are –
1. What is prime reality? What is the really real? Is there a god?
2. What is the nature of the external reality? Is there a reality outside of our mind?
Is it matter or spirit? Is it real or illusion? Was it created?
3. What is a human being? A machine or an evolved animal or a god or a created
being?
4. What happens at death? Reincarnation? Or resurrection? Or cease to exist?
5. Is knowledge possible? And how can one know? Is there absolute truth? Can one
know truth? (If someone has a Worldview that knowledge is not possible then
they have no basis for arguing such a belief!)
6. How do we know what is right and wrong?
7. What is the meaning of human history? For Christianity it is linear and is going
somewhere – it has a goal. But for the Hindu it is cyclical and based in
reincarnation.
Worldviews can be evaluated by examining how well they meet the criteria of -
Having internal consistency and no contradictions.
Having values and meaning that can be lived out in everyday life
Having external comprehensiveness in that it accounts for all the facts.
Having correspondence –all the facts fit together in a way that makes sense.
The Christian Worldview.
The Christian Worldview has been Savonarola‟s whole focus up to this point. He has tried
to show that it is the only true Worldview because it explains the truth about God,
creation, mankind and salvation. He has shown God is one, transcendent and immanent
– separate from but involved with the universe.
Islam and Judaism also believe in a personal God who can intervene in his universe. But
Savonarola will explain the major differences between them and Christianity are, first,
they teach man is saved and put in right relationship with God by his own efforts.
Christianity teaches man can only be saved by God.
Ephes. 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not
from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no-one can boast.
Secondly they both have misrepresented Jesus Christ by misinterpreting the clear
evidence concerning his person, and by rejecting him as Saviour.
263 James Sire, The Universe Next Door, Inter Varsity Press-Academic, Downers Grove, 2004
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
121
His review of the Christian Worldview has demonstrated the consistency of belief in God
as Trinity, Man as a creation with a purpose in life, but in need of salvation and Christ as
God‟s appointed Saviour. Having been saved a man becomes a new creation with a new
hope. In this life there is the project of sanctification in the life of the Spirit and in the
fellowship of the Church, and after death there is the promise of resurrection and
glorious intimacy with God. This Worldview answers the main questions we may have
about life and meaning and truth.
Human Philosophies fail to explain the purpose of life or the true nature
of man.
Secular philosophies are defective beliefs because they provide no purpose for life here
or hereafter. They are confused about the nature of man. They are confused about
creation. They are confused about how we know and the theory of knowledge. They are
confused about the purpose and nature of worship.
Again, the heathen schools of philosophy, besides their many grave errors, had
nothing definite or certain to say about the nature of divine worship. Their ideas
concerning divine providence are wild imagination. So, far from being profitable
for man's salvation or honouring to religion, their teaching was merely a source of
confusion for mankind. Nevertheless, we must not despise the valuable part of
the old philosophy, but rather make use of it ourselves. Even though it is not
sufficient to bring us to salvation, it is often of great assistance to us in refuting
the enemies of the Faith.264
Astrology is futile, irrational and false.
Astrology was everywhere and many thought human life was determined by the stars.
The Church bought into this belief and many major decisions were made on the basis of
astrological predictions. They took their authority for doing this by noting that the
watching astrologers, the magi, sensed a prediction of the start of a new era with a new
ruler emerging from Judea, and following a star they found Christ.
But Savonarola makes the following judgment. The idea that the stars can govern
human affairs has led some to worship them as gods. But the stars are not the cause of
the actions a man performs, because minds are free and are not controlled by the stars.
The stars do not control man‟s temperament, because they are non-intelligent objects. If
non-intelligent objects controlled man the result would be actions that are simply
instinctive. But this is not the case when we see how people are so varied in their actions
and motives; therefore their actions are voluntary and not controlled.
People are capable of making mistakes because their actions are free and not controlled.
Control would lead to repetitive actions and uniformity whereas we see the variety and
264 TOTC – Page 172
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
122
difference in human actions and choices.
If a man were controlled then he would not be morally responsible. Men are influenced
by their environment and events but can still resist because they are free and have free
will. So stars are ineffective as a control because they cannot overcome free will.
Worship of the stars or of the life force in the universe is empty and dangerous. Our
knowledge of the stars is too limited and therefore we have no basis for attributing
particular powers to them. Such belief is irrational and leads us away from the truth
about God.
Stars do not foretell future events. Predictions of the future would be too general to be
of particular use and too many variables exist for any prediction to be certain.
Polytheistic Religions are evil and they usurp the honour due to God.
The Scriptures teach that the powers behind idols and other gods are evil spirits.265 They
are evil because they usurp the honour due to God. They are evil because they
encourage evil actions. They are evil because they do not lead men to salvation. They
are evil because they claim powers only available to God. They are evil because they
have sometimes encouraged sexual immorality. They are evil because they have
sometimes encouraged the sacrifice of the innocents. They are evil because they are
sometimes cruel – even allowing their own children to be mutilated or killed.
Judaism is condemned by its own Scriptures for rejecting the Messiah
In evaluating the Worldview of Judaism, he notes that this is not the religion of the Old
Testament Jews. After the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple, then the
prophecy of Hosea was fulfilled. Hosea 3:4 For the Israelites will live for many days
without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or idol. There
was no king or government till 1948, no temple, no priesthood, no sacrifice. The Jews
had a complete change of religion, which is unique in the history of the world – and
almost more remarkable – they would cease from their most consistent sin – they would
no more be involved with idolatry.
Savonarola chooses to examine Judaism on the basis of their own Scriptures. Having no
sacrificial system anymore, they became people of the book. His purpose is not to judge
and dismiss Judaism, but to prove that Jesus is the Messiah.
Now, all their hope is centred on the Messiah, for whose coming they still look. If
we are able to prove to them that the Messiah has already come, and is Jesus
265 1 Cor. 10:20-21 the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
123
Christ our Saviour, then they cannot deny that our religion is of God, and that
they are in error.
We have promised in this Book not to appeal to the witness of any authority, but
to reason alone. But here our reasoning is based on the authority in which our
adversaries believe, because this is most convincing for them, and most
profitable to other unbelievers.
Therefore, on the authority of the Prophets, we shall prove that Jesus Christ of
Nazareth, crucified by the Jews, is the Messiah of the Patriarchs and Prophets,
and that He was, in many ways, foretold and foreshadowed in Holy Scripture.266
His first assertion is that Jesus is the Messiah. God promised a Messiah through the
prophecy of Moses, “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from
among your own brothers. You must listen to him. For this is what you asked of the Lord
your God” (Deut. 18:15-16)
So It is certain, and acknowledged by all the Jews, that the details concerning the
Messiah were foretold in the Mosaic Law, in the Psalms, and in the Prophets. That
is to say, there are many predictions concerning His race, place of birth, the time
of His coming, His life and teaching, His works, and many other things unique to
the Messiah. It is also known, throughout the world, that the Old Testament,
interpreted by Christian doctors, shows that all that is written of the Messiah is
true of Jesus of Nazareth. In fact, so aptly do the prophecies of the Old
Testament apply to Christ and to His Church, that if the Jews were not so loud in
proclaiming the antiquity of Moses and the Prophets, their predictions might be
taken as forgeries created by Christians.267
The Scriptures give detailed prophetic promises, which Jesus fully fulfilled. The
question is, „If Jesus is not the Messiah – then why did God not stop him causing such
confusion by him matching the prophecies so perfectly?‟ If he was not the Messiah then
God allowed Christians to be deluded and the Jews would reject any other messiah who
might come because none could more perfectly fulfil the prophecies than Jesus.
The Scriptures give an exact time for his coming – and that is when Jesus
appeared. If he is not the Messiah then it is now too late for any other messiah to fulfil
the prophecy of Daniel which states the time of his coming. Savonarola gives an
exegesis of Daniel 9, which predicts a decree to rebuild Jerusalem, followed by units of
sabbatical years after which the Messiah will come. He would be „cut off’ meaning
„rejected‟ or „killed‟. Then Jerusalem and the Temple would be destroyed again.
These things happened as described. The Jews had been taken into exile and Daniel was
writing in exile in Babylon. After the Persians had conquered the Babylonian empire they
ruled over lands, which included Israel. In 444 BC the Persian king Artaxerxes gave
permission to the Jews to rebuild Jerusalem, which was still in ruins after having been
266 TOTC – Page 181
267 TOTC – Page 182
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
124
destroyed earlier by the Babylonians. There had been previous decrees allowing the Jews
to take a group back to Israel and to rebuild the Temple, but the city lay in ruins. The
Jews rebuilt the Temple and the city of Jerusalem. About 33 AD Jesus entered Jerusalem
as the Messiah who had been promised by this prophecy. The crowds welcomed him,
but within the week the people had turned and he was cut off and crucified by the
Romans. About 70 AD the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. The Temple
was not rebuilt and the system of sacrifices and the Jewish Priesthood was lost.
Savonarola does not give the method of calculation in this prophecy, but he is aware
that some ancient Rabbis had made the calculation and had no answer as to why the
Messiah could not be Jesus. It is interesting to note they also view Daniel 9 as giving a
date for the arrival of the Messiah. Maimonides (Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon) says:
Daniel has elucidated to us the knowledge of the end times. However, since they
are secret, the wise [rabbis] have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah’s
coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that
the End Times have already come but there is no sign of the Messiah. 268
Today there are some slight variations in the method of calculation, but most
commentators are agreed that an actual date is prophesied by Daniel, which matches
the coming of Jesus. One common form of the calculation sees the prophecy in three
parts: The „7 sevens‟ in Daniel 9:25. The „62 sevens‟ in Daniel 9:25. The 70th „seven‟ in
Daniel 9:27.
The 7 and 62 of the first two periods are added together to make 69. These are added
together because it is said that at the end of this period the Messiah would appear.
These „sevens‟ are taken as seven years, not days, weeks or months. (There is a
previous reference to a period of seventy years in verse 2).
These 69 sevens (69x7 = 483) equate to 483 years; from the decree to rebuild
Jerusalem to the time the Messiah comes to Jerusalem. But the years are not periods of
365 days as in modern calendars, but based on the lunar calendar used at the time. This
had twelve months each with 30 days, making a year 360 days.
So the 483 years are multiplied by 360 days, giving a total of 173,880 days. These
173,880 days are then related to our calendar of 365.25 days to a year. This enables us
to use our calendar to see when the prophecy was fulfilled. 173,880 days divided by
365.25 gives 476 (solar) years. The beginning of the 476 years is the decree given by
Artaxerxes to Nehemiah, to rebuild Jerusalem. Nehemiah 2:1 In the month of Nisan, in
the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes'. This would be Nissan 1, 444 BC, which is March
5, 444 B.C. in our calendar system. The first year would run from 444 to 443, so we take
the 443 years BC from the 476 and these leaves 33 years AD. So 33 AD would be the
time when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, proclaiming himself as king as
prophesied in Zechariah. Some scholars have claimed that there are exactly 173,880
days from March 5, 444 BC to April 6, 33 AD – the date of Palm Sunday.
Zech. 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem!
See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on
a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.
268 Igeret Teiman, Chapter 3 page 24
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
125
The Scriptures state that the Messiah would die (be cut off) and that his death
would coincide with the end of the sacrificial system and the destruction of the
Temple.
His Apostles followed Him, and they taught the Jews that the legal sacrifices and
ceremonies need no longer be observed. As the reality had come, it was right
that the things that foretold His coming should come to an end.269
The Jews describe the present time as an exile as they continue to wait for the
Messiah. The first exile was a punishment for idolatry. Savonarola suggests that the
present sufferings of the Jewish people must be for a sin more serious than idolatry and
he identifies this sin as the rejection of Jesus – the true Messiah. This has left Judaism
spiritually bankrupt with no further prophets or miraculous signs. In contrast, the Church
shows the signs of the Holy Spirit so lacking in Judaism.
The gift of prophecy has dried up and is not found among them. God does not
now show that they are his people with any special sign, as He did in the past. On
the other hand, the Church of the Gentiles shows signs of holiness of life, true
religion, and the wonderful works of Christ and of His saints. 270
His conclusion is - we are driven to conclude that, either God has deceived us or Jesus
Christ is the Messiah.271
Christian Heresies and Cults are often immoral and damage the unity of
the Church by rejecting the teaching of the Scriptures and the Church
God‟s purpose is unity and peace, centred in truth. Christ delegated authority to Peter
and the Apostles as the focus of unity and authority for teaching. Heresy rejects the
authority, the teaching, and the unity of the Church. Many heretics reject the Scriptures
and some lead immoral lives. Heresies are often irrational and their teachings
contradictory.
Islam offers no certain salvation because it rejects the divinity of Christ
and his atonement.
Please note the DISCLAIMER I have published at the start of my edition of the Triumph
of the Cross. As I state elsewhere, some of the arguments Savonarola uses against
Islam are what we today would regard as unacceptable.
269 TOTC – Page 184
270 TOTC – Page 187
271 TOTC – Page 188
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
126
He observes that the Qur‟an is confused and contradictory. It accepts Christ but rejects
his divinity. He believes it supports immoral actions and that the Prophet did not perform
miracles but spread his religion by violence. The ultimate goal of Islam is not intimacy
with God, but material pleasures. It offers no certain salvation and its growth in numbers
of followers is not a proof of its truth.
Conclusion.
His conclusions are carefully drawn to build one on the other to take the reader on to a
response of faith and not just to go away with one or two notions to muse upon. This is
Apologetics with a purpose – as set out right at the start of the article. The steps of the
conclusion are –
Christianity is Reasonable and has a Solid Foundation
Other Worldviews do not have such Solid Foundation272
Compare it with the reasonings and philosophy of any other option on offer – it is
superior.
Where else shall we find a religion established on such solid grounds of reason as
Christianity? Philosophers ignore the true destiny of human life. Astrology is a
web of superstition. Idolatry contains neither morality nor truth. Judaism is
refuted by its own prophets of old, and by the present captivity of its followers.
The discord between heretics, and the death of their sects, is a strong proof that
they are in error. Islam is an outrage against every principle of philosophy.
Christianity alone is resplendent with natural and supernatural reason and is
adorned by holiness, wisdom, miracles, and wondrous deeds. 273
It would be unreasonable not to act on the evidence and commit to
Christ
So if reason has brought us this far, it would be unreasonable not to act on the findings
and to commit to Christ and to call on his grace. This course of action is required,
because to not do so will have implications, and to do so will be to experience the truth
and grace of Christ.
Christianity alone is resplendent with natural and supernatural reason and is
adorned by holiness, wisdom, miracles, and wondrous deeds. Consequently, can
any intelligent man hold back from a wholehearted acceptance of the Faith of
Christ? Can any one fail to see the rashness and stupidity of those who reject a
religion which has been blessed by God and preserved by Him through centuries
of persecution, and consecrated by the blood of innumerable martyrs?
273 TOTC – Page 198
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
127
Surely, every man of sound judgment acknowledges Christianity is true. Every
man must believe that another life exists, into which we all must pass and that
each one of us must stand before the awe inspiring Judge. He will place on His
left hand the wicked condemned to eternal punishment, and, on His right, the
good who will enter into everlasting bliss. In unutterable glory they shall see and
enjoy fellowship with God the Trinity. They shall rejoice in the grace of our all-
conquering and triumphant Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, to whom be power,
and divinity, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, for ever and ever. AMEN.274
17 Evaluation of his Apologetic – does he conform to the criteria he set
himself?
I define the Apologetic task (as does Savonarola) in the words of Peter –
1 Peter 3:15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to
give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason (APOLOGIA) for the
hope that you have.
Tellingly, Savonarola leaves off - But do this with gentleness and respect.
(and leaves out the next verse) 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who
speak maliciously against your good behaviour in Christ may be ashamed of their
slander.
This definition has three distinct aspects.
First to commend Christ by our way of life – living under his direction and
Lordship.
Second there should be a prepared and reasoned explanation for the hope we
have in Christ.
Third there should be a means of expressing our faith which is marked by
gentleness and respect for those to whom we are called to witness.
Quite naturally this task has a cultural setting and needs to be related to the
understanding of the hearer, otherwise it is not apologetic, but simply a collection of
words – without communication. As our pattern in the task we have not only the Apostle
Paul in his witness to the Athenians275, but the example of Christ himself – who is the
WORD of God – the communication from heaven.
He lived under the direction and Lordship of Christ
274 TOTC – Page 199
275 Acts 17
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
128
Known as a man of prayer and devotion, his love of Christ shines through his writings.
He was ahead of the Reformers in his grasp of the biblical understanding of justification.
We must regenerate the Church ... God remits the sins of men, and justifies them
by his mercy. There are as many compassions in heaven as there are justified
men upon earth; for none are saved by their own works. No man can boast of
himself; and if, in the presence of God, we could ask all these justified sinners --
Have you been saved by your own strength? - all would reply as with one voice,
'Not unto us, O Lord! not unto us; but to thy name be the glory!' -- Therefore, O
God, do I seek thy mercy, and I bring not unto thee my own righteousness; but
when by thy grace thou justifies one, then thy righteousness belongs unto me;
for grace is the righteousness of God. -- O God, save me by thy righteousness,
that is to say, in thy Son, who alone among men was found without sin! 276
His argument and schema have been evaluated in this thesis.
His gentleness and respect.
There is tenderness and love for his people and the city of Florence and his judgement is
reserved for those who are a threat to the „flock of Christ‟. Much of what he says is of
the flavour of Christ who condemned the Pharisees.
Matthew 23:15 ‘Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!
You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one,
you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
There is evidence of his courage and gentleness in the face of torture, but many of the
comments on his character come from his opponents. With the distance of time we are
probably best to note the tone of his writing, compared with other more strident
Christians of his day, and also to note that like Jesus, ‘the common people heard him
gladly’ 277
I believe that in his culture he was an effective Apologist and fulfilled the criteria of the
Apologetic task according to the Apostle Peter.
People are searching for something real and authentic. Christianity and the Christian
Worldview offer the total truth this generation so desperately craves. But they will not
take us seriously unless our churches, organisations, and workplaces demonstrate an
authentic way of life, and exhibit the character of God in all our relationships and modes
of living.
Personal Bias
I admit that I approach Savonarola from the position of a mainstream orthodox
276 Quoted by J. H. Merle D'Aubigne in History of the Reformation. Vol. 1, American Tract
Society, New York, 1848, Pages 96-97
277 Mark 12:37
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
129
Protestant. I am also a member of the leadership team of the Maranatha Community.278
In the Community we declare our allegiance to the whole Body of Christ. We are drawn
from all the Christian traditions (including Catholic and Orthodoxy) and affirm the
central, prime truths that Christians hold as non-negotiable – The Nicene Creed,
Authority of Scripture, and a Personal Relationship with Christ as Saviour and Lord.
This means that I delight in the clarity of Savonarola‟s presentation of the prime truths
of the gospel and appreciate the integrated argument of his Apologetics. I have gained
enormously from his writings and come to appreciate some of the helpful insights of the
Roman Catholic teaching and spirituality.
Criticisms and evaluation
Though I regard Savonarola as a kind of hero I hope that this does not make me too
uncritical in my evaluation of him and his ministry. He reveals some weaknesses that I
would want to raise and, in some instances, take issue with them.
There are those who have pointed out a flaw in his character and recount a story that
under intense torture he recanted his teaching against the corruption of the Church.
These writers then tell us that when released from torture he refused to recant and was
distressed that he should have given way to his tormentors. My response is to say that
this is of little significance. His character was displayed publicly throughout his life and in
his death. All affirm that he was a man of faith, devotion, courage and dignity. He may
have given way under torture, but we cannot be sure when the only eyewitnesses were
those who were biased in their reporting.
My concerns are related to his writings and particularly this work, The Triumph of the
Cross. I find some of his arguments in support of the Sacrament of Penance and other
Roman Catholic ceremonies, are contrived and do not bear the clarity and conviction of
his other propositions. It would seem that these were included as a sop to the Church of
his day with its preoccupation with ceremonial and sacerdotal ministry.
Likewise his defence of Images of the Saints and Virgin and the fact that the quality of
veneration offered to them is in a category different from the worship offered to God, is
unconvincing.
We give to the cross and crucifix the worship of latria279, which is the worship that
we pay to God. We honour an image of the Virgin Mary with an inferior honour,
yet with greater honour than that which we give to representations of the other
saints. We honour the saints as the blessed friends of God. We erect their images
in order to recall them to our memory, to inspire ourselves to virtue by their
example, and to raise our hearts in prayer to God, through their intercession.280
The forensic division of worship into particular categories comes from the scholastic
tradition of the Church and does not relate easily to reality. For example, a person
278 http://www.maranathacommunity.org.uk
279 Latria - The highest kind of worship offered to God alone - distinguished by Roman Catholics
from dulia - the inferior worship paid to saints.
280 TOTC – Page 168
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
130
offering veneration to a statue of the Virgin is probably so intent on what they are doing
that they cannot be expected to analyse the quality of their worship to make sure that it
falls into the right category. If it were of the wrong quality, it would fall into idolatry. At
no point does he relate this issue simply to the mandate of the Ten Commandments –
that there should be no graven images.
There is also the concern, which I have raised in my disclaimer, with regard to Islam and
Judaism. Some of his remarks are strident and in today‟s culture, they are offensive.
Something can be said in mitigation when one remembers that he was writing at a time
when the major pastime was hearing scholars and philosophers publicly argue and
verbally abuse each other. However, as I mention in the disclaimer, it falls short of the
admonition of St Peter that we should defend the faith, „But do this with gentleness and
respect.‟
Lastly, in terms of criticism I would mention a weakness rather than a fault. I believe
that this particular book, The Triumph of the Cross, would be much clearer and the
arguments more explicit if he had defined his terms. Two clear examples are his use of
the words, „form’ and ‘essence’, which he uses as fundamental terms in his arguments.
He takes the time to criticise Plato‟s use of ‘form’, to comment on Aristotle‟s definition of
„form’, but does not define the meaning he intends when he himself relies on „form’ for
his argument.
Nevertheless, these criticisms are completely overshadowed by the glory of his
contribution to our understanding of our Faith. Over the past few years I have grown to
appreciate Savonarola and to bless God for the inspiration he has spoken into my life. It
would have been wonderful to hear him preach to thousands in the packed Duomo in
Florence. It would have been a joy to see many converted to Christ through his
exposition of the gospel.
One reason for him writing The Triumph of the Cross was „to strengthen the faith of
believers and to expose the irrationality of non-believers’ arguments so that simple and
uneducated people are released from the deception played on them’.281 In his writings,
he has done this for me.
He has a beautifully crafted argument which leads to Christ and not just to a first cause.
He is brave in appealing to Christian Character as an evidence at a time of corruption in
the Church. He himself was known for his godly life and people were able to tell the real
followers of the Man of Nazareth, when they came across one. He appeals to what
people know instinctively about what is Christ-like and what is not.
H D Macdonald says - The Bible does not set about to prove God and claim him as the
first cause. 282 Some Apologetics take us to a first cause only; Savonarola takes us to the
Cross of Christ to meet the very Son of God as Saviour and Lord.
Today, some still say that the arguments of Aquinas are weak and useless, while others
say that together they become more convincing – as if by collecting several broken
planks a bridge may be constructed which would have been impossible with only one
broken plank. The key issue is that they are ALL broken. But are they? Colin Brown
suggests that there may be fresh insights to come from Aquinas. 283
281 TOTC – Page 81
282 H D Macdonald, I and He, London, 1967. Page 118
283 Brown, Colin, Philosophy And The Christian Faith, Tyndale Press, London 1969, Page 17ff
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
131
However Savonarola is more sophisticated and does not rely on the Five Ways. His
argument is that there is evidence in Scripture, the Christian Community and the Cross
of Christ which requires explanation and the only explanation that will fit is that Christ is
God – the God of Aquinas and the first cause of Aristotle.
18 Evaluation of his Apologetic – is my proposition established?
Proposition – Savonarola’s Apologetic Schema and Analysis of Worldviews are
the key to effective 21st Century Apologetics.
His method is to show that Apologetics is an integrated whole. There are many planks
that can be used to bridge the gap between certainty and uncertainty about God. The
planks are not broken, but they are individually too short to bridge the gap. But together
they can be built into a robust bridge that proves the rationality of faith. This is achieved
when like Savonarola, we avoid compartmentalism in Apologetics.
Parallels between the 15th and 21st Centuries.
In the 21st Century we have many conflicting Worldviews offering an explanation and
purpose for living. We also have particular evils and problems that make life less than we
would hope it could be. Amazingly these closely parallel the issues of Savonarola‟s day,
which he addressed with clarity and concern. Therefore the things he had to say are
relevant and critically important for us today.
Some of the labels or names may have changed but the issues are the same. We have a
plague but now it is called HIV/Aids. We have a Church that has corrupted the gospel
and become lost in pluralism and power politics.284 We live in societies where life is
cheap and violence is rife. We have excesses of wealth and materialism. We have
corruption in politics. We have abject poverty and famine. We have fascination with New
Age religions. We have secular Atheistic Humanism and philosophy. We have
homosexual „gay rights‟ tearing apart whole Christian communions.285 Each issue is
284 Only 19% of people claiming to be Christians believe the religion they practice is the only true religion. Sadly, the majority of people who claim to be Christian don‟t accept the biblical definition of Christianity. (U.S. News and World Report, 2002 poll)
285 Within the mother Church of England.. a survey in 2002 found that a third of the Church's clergy doubted or disbelieved in the physical resurrection and only half were convinced of the truth of the virgin birth. And, as the recent history of North American Anglicanism all too clearly
demonstrates, once the creeds have been emptied of shared meaning, biblical morality shares a similar fate.
This process is already well under way in England. In July 2005 the English House of Bishops gave their support to the British Government's legislation creating Civil Partnerships which was explicitly designed for those in same gender sexual relationships and gave such partnerships a legal status virtually indistinguishable from marriage. Clergy of the Church of England were allowed to enter
such partnerships on the rather improbable, and certainly unenforceable, condition of abstinence. Dr John Richardson speaking at the Global Anglican Future Conference, Jerusalem, July 2008
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
132
addressed in the Triumph of the Cross – even to the question of the role of Islam.286
His Analysis of Worldviews in the context of 21st Century
Though the Worldviews held today seem to be as numerous as the individuals who make
up the world‟s population, yet there are just a few fundamental frameworks through
which the world is viewed.
Atheism – the assumption that there is no God, underpins both the politics of Marxism
and Secular Humanism. It also is the foundational belief of existentialism.
Pantheism – the assumption that Universe is God. This is found in Hinduism, Buddhism,
Christian Science, and New Age religions. It believes not that God created the universe,
but that God is the universe. Most Pantheists believe in reincarnation with the body
going through various cycles.
Deism – the assumption that God created the universe, but he does not intervene. The
Laws of Nature cannot be broken. God does not answer prayer and is distant.
Finite Godism - God is limited by human freedom and sin. This view arises in part from
the problem of Theodicy. How can a good God not intervene and solve the problem of
evil? And isn‟t this a world of God‟s creation? – if so, then it must be the best of all
possible worlds, but it does not look like it.
Polytheism - is the belief that there are many gods. This is held in Hinduism, but also
among Mormons who teach that there are gods for each planet. It is also found in the
New Age Worldview and comes in many forms. It has strong links with modern
psychology and it is the dominant Worldview in the United Nations. It is behind women‟s
rights, gay rights and political correctness. It is the core Worldview in films like Star
Wars with its blessing – „May the force be with you’. The practises of the New Age
Movement include astrology, Para-psychology, ESP and occultic rites
Savonarola‟s answers still are effective in refuting these Worldviews. He shows their
inner contradictions and he addresses them on the issue of Truth. But he also makes a
strong argument concerning the breakdown of morality saying that when truth goes,
moral values disintegrate.
We have great new cities and inspiring architecture. We have an explosion of
information, communication and cultural expression. But so often what is developed is
286 Why did we have to wait for Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, born and raised in Muslim Pakistan, to remind us that, as he put it, 'the beliefs, values and virtues of Great Britain have been formed by the Christian faith'? Just as important, why did we have to wait for him to urge us to do something about restoring that faith before we either sink into a yelling chaos of knives, fists and boots, or swoon into the strong, implacable arms of Islam? Most of our homegrown prelates are more
interested in homosexuality or in spreading doubt about the gospel or urging the adoption of Sharia law. Peter Hitchens, writing in The Daily Mail, London, 31 May 2008.
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
133
used for the destruction of morality. Pornography, drugs and gay rights dominate the
media, education, religion and politics – just as in his day. State violence still destroys
the lives of many and terrorism claims lives on a daily basis.
The importance of Savonarola for us is that he enables us to answer the questions that
are raised by the competing voices and forces that claim a hearing in our day. He speaks
words that re-affirm our faith. He exposes the futility of the New Age and Post Modern
ideas. He confounds the arguments of the Secular Atheist. And he teaches us how to
present an integrated apologetic for our faith. Savonarola meets his objectives and
restores confidence for the believer.
There is a battle in which we are involved, even if we are not aware of it. The battle is a
real Spiritual Warfare in which we are to knock down the Devil‟s strongholds in the
minds of people, where proud and illusory arguments stop people coming to know God.
2 Corinthians 10:4- 5. New Living Translation: We use God’s mighty weapons, not mere
worldly weapons, to knock down the Devil’s strongholds. With these weapons we
break down every proud argument that keeps people from knowing God. With
these weapons we conquer their rebellious ideas, and we teach them to obey Christ.
His, is not one among several apologetic tools - but the key to unifying them all.
Several apologists are now recognising that the compartmentalism of different apologetic
disciplines is weakening effective argument. They also note that specialisation in the use
of one or two apologetic tools is not satisfactory. Just listing the variety of possible
apologetic tools does not instil confident in the believer. So most Christians fall back on
Testimonial Apologetics – and personal testimony is absolutely valid. They would be less
confident handling the tools of Philosophical Apologetics, Historical Apologetics, Scientific
Apologetics, Legal Apologetics and Moral Apologetics, as a means of defending their
faith.
We earlier noted how Norman Geisler has responded to this situation by offering what he
describes as Interdisciplinary Apologetics. And noted how Phil Fernandes developed
what he calls Cumulative Apologetics. Geisler‟s approach is seen worked out in his
book, Why I am a Christian. 287 In this volume he invites 16 leading Apologists 288 to
each provide the apologetic argument from their area of specialism. Their willingness to
share in this way reflects their awareness of the need for a fresh and better form of
apologetic presentation. From the quantity of evidence they claim „the chances of
Christianity being false are so low that only a fool can reject the evidence that is
available. Quoting Romans chapter one, Fernandes concludes that ‘to go against this
evidence is a leap in the dark and a suppression of the light’.
Romans 1:18-22 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the
godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
287 Norman L Geisler and Paul K Hoffman, Why I am a Christian, leading thinkers explain why they believe, Baker Book House in 2006.
288 Francis Beckwith, Walter Bradley, J Budziszewski, Ergun Mehmet Caner, Winifred Corduan,
William Lane Craig, John S Feinberg, Norman L Geisler, R Douglas Geivett, Gary Habermas, Paul K Hoffman, Peter Kreeft, Barry R Leventhal, Josh Mcdowell, J P Moreland, Hugh Ross, Ravi Zacharias
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
134
since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it
plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—
his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being
understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to
him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
Their admirable approaches would be revolutionised if like Savonarola, they presented a
holistic schema. His insights would not undermine their good work, nor discount any
valuable insight or evidence from any source, but integrate all as a unified presentation.
19 It is important that his teaching should be recovered and promoted
for the benefit of the Christian community in the 21st Century.
The Post Modern world recognizes differences in culture and philosophy and lifestyle, and
encourages us to tolerate and appreciate the subtle insights each can provide.
Postmodernism has come to dominate the underlying ethos of global academia and
media. Those who hold to this philosophy want us to see it as a way that can lead to
harmony if we just tolerate one another‟s beliefs.
Though many in a particular population may hold a Christian Worldview, even to the
point of it being the Worldview held by the majority of the population, the dominant
Worldview will be the one held by the leading thinkers, media and academics.
This was also true of Savonarola‟s day. The renaissance had many common attitudes
with those of today. Ideas became the novelty of academia and popular culture, but
Truth and Faith became casualties as old values were discarded.
We have seen how Savonarola challenged his hearers and readers by exposing the
inconsistencies of their Worldviews. Having shown that the philosophies of humanism
had no rational meaning or eternal purpose, he then presented the Christian Worldview
as an issue of truth.
Charles Colson has pointed out the importance of recognizing other Worldviews because
they concern first order issues affecting eternal salvation, and because the main issue is
Truth. This means that people who claim to be Christian, do not accept the Biblical
Definition of what a Christian is – that is, someone who follows Christ as the ONLY
saviour. He writes -
Most pro-life Americans cannot explain why they are pro-life. In his ‘Before the
Shooting Begins’, sociologist James Davidson Hunter discovered that most people
base their moral convictions on personal feelings instead of objective truth. In
this arena private experience has the final word. Consequently, if morality is
based on feeling, then we refrain from speaking about objective truth because we
might hurt someone’s feelings.
That’s why the watershed issue of our day is truth ~ the biblical teaching that
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
135
truth is not private but transcendent and deeply rooted in ultimate reality. 289
Postmodernism rides very lightly to truth and treats it as relative. „You have your truth
and I have mine’. But the truth is that this pervasive Worldview only works in social
areas. It cannot work in the areas of medicine – because it would lead to death. If the
doctor says that you have cancer, you do not say that it is just his construct on a story.
It cannot work in the areas of technology – because it would lead to breakdown. An
engineer servicing an airliner cannot be left to choose the parts and procedures
according to his personal truth. It cannot work in the area of law – because it would lead
to injustice. A person cannot be discharged and found innocent, against all the evidence,
just by pleading that the action was not illegal or immoral according to their personal
truth and that to disregard their personal truth would be intolerant.
Other Worldviews have inbuilt contradictions. Those who proclaim, „There is no absolute
truth‟ do not seem to recognise that this is an absolute truth claim and is therefore self
refuting. Many of them are also bold enough to assert, „Atheistic evolution is absolutely
true‟, which means they are sceptical about every single area of life – except evolution.
This is because we are dealing with people who do not think rationally anymore. As St
Paul says, they are - always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 2 Tim.
3:7
Yet such dominant Worldviews create an atmosphere which inhibits Christians from
sharing the truth of their faith, and undermines the meagre faith of many young people.
Savonarola‟s insights and Apologetic would enable them to discern what is going on and
to find confidence in the person of Christ – who is Truth.
20 Concluding remarks on the Purpose of Apologetics
Savonarola justifies his purpose as Apologist as we have noted above. He wanted to
reach the intellectuals of his day, with reasons to open their minds up to the
philosophical consistency of the Christian faith. In doing this there was the hope that
they might also have their hearts opened to the gospel. He also wanted to re-affirm the
faith of those who had been shaken by the secular „wisdom of their day‟. In doing this he
sought to protect the weak and guard the faithful.
We too need to clarify why we should engage in the same task today, and note some of
the opinions put forward to devalue the enterprise. Like Savonarola‟s day, we have a
culture that resists deep convictions, arguments and reasoning. Christians who are
swamped with these attitudes become reluctant to engage in Apologetics.
But this is not the faith as revealed in the Bible. It is full of argument and reasoning. The
objections and heresies are confronted and handled by argument. It was a characteristic
of the teaching style of Jesus and his Apostles. This was because the believers needed to
have their minds fed with the truth of God so that they could stand firm against the
voices ranged against them. Gresham Machen asserts –
289 Charles Colson, Lies that Go Unchallenged in Popular Culture, Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, 2005
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
136
Certainly one thing is clear, if Christian Apologetics suffers, injury will come to
every member of the body of Christ.290
The task today is not aimed primarily at the sceptics who have closed their hearts to the
gospel and stand against God‟s people. Our concern should be for our own young people
and children who are troubled by the hostile arguments and peer pressures confronting
them. They need to know that their faith is grounded on fact and is „reasonable’ and can
be defended intellectually. Some are more aware of what can be said against the faith,
than what can be said for it.
Behind the close circle of our own children and young people lies another circle of
countless millions of those who are not against the faith, but have discounted it because
they assume it to be untrue, or only relative to a particular group of believers. It is
absurd for us to expect them to come to trust someone about whom they know nothing.
There has to be a reasoned presentation of the gospel of Christ.
Thankfully new Savonarolas are still being raised up by God, because he recognises our
need of them. May he bless and use each of them.
290 Gresham Machen, The Importance of Christian Scholarship in the Defence of the Gospel. A reprinted talk given in London in 1932 and reproduced in New Reformation
Magazine, September 1996
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
137
21 Works cited and Bibliography
Book of Common Prayer 1662, Cambridge University Press
The New Dictionary Of Christian Ethics And Pastoral Theology, editors Atkinson
and Field, Inter Varsity Press, Leicester, 1995
The New Catholic Encyclopaedia, Catholic University of America, Washington DC,
1967
Catholic Encyclopaedia online, Washington DC, 2001
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae
Helen Augur, translator, Religious Conversion, a Bio-Psychological Study, Harcourt,
Brace & Company, London, 1927
Augustine, City of God
Averroes, Al-Kashf 'an Manahij al-Adilla fi ‘Aqaid al-Milla (the Exposition of the
Methods of Proof Concerning the Beliefs of the Community)
James Montgomery Boice, Foundations Of The Christian Faith, Inter Varsity Press,
Leicester, 1981
Corrie Ten Boom, Common Sense not Needed, Christian Literature Crusade, London,
2003
Robert Brow, Origins of Religion in The World's Religions, Lion Publishing. Tring,
England, 1982, 2nd. edition 1994
Colin Brown, Christianity And Western Thought, Volume One, Inter Varsity Press,
Downers Grove, Illinois, 1990
Colin Brown, Philosophy And The Christian Faith, Tyndale Press, London, 1969
Giorgio Carbone OP, editor, Il trionfo della croce. La ragionevolezza della fede:
„The Triumph of the Cross. The reasonableness of faith‟, Edizioni Studio Domenicano.
2001
Colin Chapman, The Case For Christianity, Lion Publishing, Tring, 1981
Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus
Charles Colson, Lies that Go Unchallenged in Popular Culture, Tyndale House
Publishers, Wheaton, 2005
Charles Darwin, Origins of the Species, London, 1859
J. H. Merle D'Aubigne, History of the Reformation. Vol. 1, American Tract Society,
New York, 1848
Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, Bantam Press, London, 2006
A. G. Dickens, Martin Luther and the Reformation, English Universities Press, London
1970
Robert Deffinbaugh, Let Me See Thy Glory: A Study of the Attributes of God,
Biblical Studies Press, 2002
Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, Penguin Classics, London, 2000
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
138
Avery Dulles, A History of Apologetics, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2005
David Otis Fuller, Ed., Valiant For The Truth, A Treasury of Evangelical Writings,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1961
D B Garlington, New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology, Inter
Varsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 1995
Norman L Geisler, Christian Ethics – Options and Issues, Baker Book House. 1990
Geisler and Feinberg, Introduction to Philosophy, Baker Book House, 2005
Norman L Geisler and Paul K Hoffman, Why I am a Christian, leading thinkers
explain why they believe, Baker Book House, 2006
V. H. H. Green, Renaissance and Reformation: A Survey of European History
between 1450 and 1660, Edward Arnold, London, 1952
Thomas Guarino, First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life.
Issue: 161, Institute on Religion and Public Life. March 2006
Harriet A. Harris, Fundamentalism and Evangelicals, Clarendon Press. Oxford. 1998
P.K. Helseth, On Divine Ambivalence, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society,
44.3 , September 2001
Brian Hepplethwaite, In Defence of Christianity, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2005
Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics: Hundreds of
Answers to Crucial Questions, Inter Varsity Press, Downers Grove. 1994
Paul Kurtz, editor, Humanist Manifestos I and II, Prometheus Books, New York, 1984
Paul Kurtz, editor, Humanist Manifesto 2000: A Call for New Planetary Humanism,
Prometheus Books, New York, 2000
G E Ladd, The New Testament and Criticism, Grand Rapids. 1960
C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics, ed. Walter Hooper,
Erdmans, Grand Rapids, 1970
C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, Collins, London 1952
CS Lewis, Screwtape Letters, Collins Fontana, London, 1963
H. D. Lewis, Our Experience of God: Allen & Unwin. London. 1959
Thomas M. Lindsay, A History of the Reformation. Volume: 1, T & T Clark.
Edinburgh. 1907
F. Donald Logan, A History of the Church in the Middle Ages, Routledge Press.
London. 2002
Gresham Machen, The Importance of Christian Scholarship in the Defence of the
Gospel. A reprinted talk given in London in 1932 and reproduced in New
Reformation Magazine, September 1996
Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho the Jew; Apologies
H D Macdonald, I and He, London, 1967
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
139
Bernard McGinn, Apocalyptic Spirituality: Treatises and Letters of Lactantius,
Adso of Montier-En-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan Spirituals, Savonarola,
Paulist Press. New York, 1979
Alister McGrath, Bridge Building - Effective Christian Apologetics, Inter Varsity
Press, Leicester, 1992
John Warwick Montgomery, Evidence For Faith, Probe Books, Dallas 1991
John Warwick Montgomery, Legal Reasoning and Christian Apologetics, Christianity
Today, February 14, 1975
John Warwick Montgomery, The Law Above The Law, Minneapolis: Bethany, 1975
John Warwick Montgomery, God's inerrant word, Lessons from Luther on the
Inerrancy of Holy Writ, Trinity Press, Newburgh, 1974
John Warwick Montgomery, Law & Gospel, Oak Park: Christian Legal Society, 1978.
Reprinted in 1995 by the Canadian Institute for Law, Theology & Public Policy
John Warwick Montgomery, Faith founded on Fact, Trinity Press, Newburgh, 1978
John Warwick Montgomery, The Suicide of Christian Theology, Trinity Press,
Newburgh, 1970
Frank Morison, Who Moved the Stone?, revised edition, Faber and Faber, London,
1975
John Olin, The Catholic Reformation – Savonarola To Ignatius Loyola, Harper
Row, New York, NY, 1969
Origen, Contra Celsum, ‘Against Celsus’
Pierre Van Paassen, A Crown of Fire: The Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola,
Scribner, New York, 1960
James Packer, Evangelism And The Sovereignty Of God, Inter Varsity Fellowship,
London, 1966
Alvin Plantinga, The Dawkins Confusion - Naturalism ad absurdum, Books &
Culture, March/April 2007. Available at -
http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html
Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000
John Proctor, translator, The Triumph Of The Cross, Sands and Company, London,
1901
Jill Raitt, contributor, Bernard McGinn and John Meyendorff, editors, Christian
Spirituality: High Middle Ages and Reformation: Crossroad Publishing. New York.
1988
Renwick, A M., The Story Of The Church, Inter Varsity Fellowship, 1958
J A T Robinson, Honest to God, SCM Press, London 1963
Michael Rocke, Forbidden Friendships: Homosexuality and Male Culture in
Renaissance Florence, Oxford University Press. 1996
Bertrand Russell, Religion and Science: new edition with Introduction by Michael
Ruse, Oxford University Press, 1997
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
140
John Sanders, The God Who Risks, a Theology of Providence, Inter Varsity Press,
Downers Grove, 1998
David Sanford, in his book, If God Disappears: 9 Faith Wreckers and What to Do
about Them, Tyndale, Wheaton. 2008
Sennett, James, editor, The Analytic Theist - An Alvin Plantinga Reader, Eerdmans
Publishing, Cambridge, 1998
Francis A. Schaeffer, The God Who Is There, Inter Varsity Press, London 1968
James Sire, The Universe Next Door, Inter Varsity Press-Academic, Downers Grove,
2004
B. F. Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity, Vintage Book, New York, 1972
Lewis Smedes, Mere Morality, published by Erdmans, Grand Rapids. 1996
Sproul, R.C., Willing To Believe, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1997
CH Spurgeon, The Sword and the Trowel, The Florentine Monk, London, 1869
John G. Stackhouse Jr., Humble Apologetics: Defending the Faith Today. Oxford
University Press. New York. 2002
Angela Tilby, Science and the Soul, SPCK, London 1992
Charles De Tolnay, The Youth of Michelangelo, Princeton University Press. Princeton,
NJ. 1943
O'Dell Travers Hill, translator, The Triumph Of The Cross, Hodder, London 1868
Timothy Verdon Contributor, John Henderson, editor, Christianity and the
Renaissance: Image and Religious Imagination in the Quattrocento, Syracuse
University Press. Syracuse, NY. 1990
A D Verhey, New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology, Inter
Varsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 1995
Professor Pasquale Villari, translated from the Italian by Linda Villari, Life And Times Of
Savonarola, T. Fisher Unwin, London 1888
BB Warfield, Apologetics, available at www.graceonlinelibrary.org/articles/full
Joachim Weinhardt, PhD thesis (1998), ‘Savonarola als Apologet’, The University of
Tubingen, Germany. published by Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, 2003
Donald Weinstein, Savonarola: Piety, Prophecy and Politics in Renaissance
Florence, Bridwell Library, Dallas, 1994
Geoffrey B Wilson, Romans, Banner of Truth Trust, London 1969
Nicholas Wolterstorff, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Reflections on the Claim
that God Speaks, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995)
Internet Websites
www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html
www.graceonlinelibrary.org/articles/full
www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t126112.html
Girolamo Savonarola – The Forgotten Father of Apologetics
141
www.maranathacommunity.org.uk