The article’s headline serves as an indicator of the key subject areas for the critical analysis, by Peter Matheson, of the humanist movement and how it was intertwined to the reform movements of the sixteenth century. The reader should care about what the author is saying because of his in-depth analysis of two very different ways of thinking and how these ways of thinking reflected the culture that was around them. This subject is interesting because it offers a unique perspective on the way human self-worth and importance was viewed and how Peter Matheson believed humanism was not essentially the key force driving the reforms of the sixteenth century. After reading Matheson’s analysis of humanism and the reform movements, it seems to me …show more content…
He argues that it was more for religious and counter-religious reasons and the humanists of that time were more inclined to stray away from institutional reforms. Furthermore, he expands his argument to incorporate the fact that a concrete system of a code of values or doctrine did not exist but only a group of humanists that embodied modern day ideals. Also, he continues by saying that even the modern definition of humanists means that these individuals would not have been particularly involved with religious or moral …show more content…
He starts his argument by asking the question of how culture relates to faith and continues by expanding upon the interactions between humanism and religion. He then expands on his argument claiming that to assume humanism and reform movements as the same thing would be false. Next, he defines the sixteenth century humanist as individualistic and would have stayed out of magisterial reforms. He then goes on to give certain examples of humanists during this time but countered by stating that although, humanism existed in the sense that it was an ideal but was not a code of values or a system like it is today. Furthermore, he gave detailed examples of reformers that, without humanistic tools and styles, these reformers would have never accomplished their reforms. He then poses the question, to what extent is the success of the reformations based upon humanistic ideals and humanist’s help in general. He then links Martin Luther’s teachings and other prophets to humanist teachings saying that the mass of people that swarmed to their preaching were arguably interested because they saw the individualistic teachings and were leaning away from mass teachings because of the corruption in the church. Then he expands, stating that because of the common folk’s