BluSpot

Vayera

2009-11-10T13:32:00.001-08:00

Download now or preview on posterous

Vayera.pdf (322 KB)

Posted via email from bludrop's posterous

Untitled

2009-09-22T22:41:00.001-07:00

Posted via web from bludrop's posterous

Bnei Hechalah

2009-05-12T19:15:00.001-07:00

Bnei Hechulah by Ben Zion Shenkar
Download now or listen on posterous

Bnei Hechulah.mp3 (2169 KB)

This week our melody is Bnei Heichala. It was written by one of the giants of the kabbalistic tradition Rav Yitzchak Luria, who wrote one zemer for each meal. He was born in Jerusalem in 1535 and died in Tzfat in 1573.
This zemer is sung at the third meal on the day of Shabbat. It represents the peaceful nature of this special meal, which is normally eaten as the sun is setting. The poet invites all Jews “who yearn to see the glow of the Diminished Presence”. The Diminished Presence here refers to the Presence of G-d which exists in our world through a diminishing of His light. Because there is only favor and no anger at this time, everyone should feel comfortable sitting around the table.
The antagonist of the poem are the shells that exist around our souls. They are not invited to the table as the Jewish souls are. In kabbalistic theology, a shell disrupts our connection to the divine. On Shabbat however, the shells are left behind.

בְּנֵי הֵיכָלָא דִּכְסִיפִין
לְמֶחֱזֵי זִיו דִּזְעֵיר אַנְפִּין
יְהוֹן הָכָא בְּהַאי תַּכָּא
דְּבֵהּ מַלְכָּא בְּגִלוּפִין
צְבוּ לַחֲדָא בְּהַאי וַעֲדָא
בְּגוֹ עִירִין וְכָל גַּדְפִין
חֲדוּ הַשְׁתָּא בְּהַאי שַׁעְתָּא
דְּבֵהּ רַעֲוָא וְלֵית זַעֲפִין
קְרִיבוּ לִי חֲזוּ חֵילִי
דְּלֵית דִּינִין דִּתְקִיפִין
לְבַר נַטְלִין וְלָא עָאלִין
הַנֵּי כַלְבִּין דַּחֲצִיפִין
וְהָא אַזְמִין עַתִּיק יוֹמִין לְמִנְחָה (לְמִצְחֵהּ)
עֲדֵי יְהוֹן חַלְפִין
רְעוּ דִילֵיהּ דְּגַלֵּי לֵהּ
לְבַטָּלָא בְּכָל קְלִיפִין
יְשַׁוֵּי לוֹן בְּנֻקְבֵיהוֹן
וִיטַּמְרוּן בְּגוֹ כֵפִין
אֲרֵי הַשְׁתָּא בְּמִנְחָתָא
בְּחֶדְוָתָא דִּזְעֵיר אַנְפִּין

Members of the sanctuary who yearn/to see the glow of the Diminished Presence
May they be here at this table/in which is inscribed the King in joy
Long to be part of this assemblage/among many winged angels
Be exultant now at this very time/ in which there is favor, but no anger
Approach me, see my strength/when there are no powerful judgments
Outside, let them remain/those remain those brazen dogs
But I invite the Ancient Holy One/ at mincha, the time when they fade away
His favor when it is revealed/will negate all impure shells
May He place then in their nether holes/and hide them amongst the rocks
I ask this now at mincha time/during the exultation of the Diminished Presence

The tune is a Modzitz niggun sung by Ben Zion Shenkar

Posted via email from bludrop's posterous

Kabbalat Torah: The Pluralism Problem

2007-05-18T15:14:00.000-07:00

This past summer, I spent six weeks in Israel participating in the Nesiya Institute’s Kehilla Israel Experience. One of the intents of Nesiya is to bring together a variety of Jews from the United States and Israel. Throughout the summer, we had many discussions about Judaism. During one discussion, one of the Israelis expressed a strong dislike for “Reform” (and even Conservative) Jews, essentially alluding to the idea that they are not really Jewish. Although, thankfully, not all of the Israelis had felt this way, there were others who said that one could be only religious or secular.
Since the Reform/Progressive and the Conservative/Masorti movements are not very large in Israel, it is not surprising that an Israeli would have trouble understanding the other movements. After a few weeks living with people who identify themselves with these groups though, many Israelis still could not understand these Jews who are “sort-of religious”, but don’t necessarily keep kosher, for example. One of the Israelis was also confused by one of our counselors who is planning on becoming a Rabbi. When we visited an Arab Shuk in Rahat, the largest Bedouin town in Israel, this counselor bought some cheese from one of the vendors, who was obviously not certified kosher. Even though the participant was no longer observant, and would have gladly eaten the food himself, he was disgusted at the fact that someone studying to be a rabbi would do such a thing. Although Israeli society definitely presents an extreme example of these attitudes, as there is significant disconnect among many of the secular and religious Jews, it still presents a great example of some of the problems that we are facing today within our own Jewish community.
In the States, Jews today may “get along” with each other, but they rarely “get together” with each other. Pluralist youth groups, like BBYO, exist, but when involved in one of these groups, teens think of themselves as “non-denonominational” members, and not as representatives of their own denomination. Because of this, bringing different Jews together in one group is clearly different than bringing different groups of Jews together.
This notion of bringing together all different kinds of Jewish teenagers for one event was the philiosophy behind the Chicagoland Symposium of Jewish Youth, which held its first-ever sympsosium this past December right here at Beth Emet. For one day, we explored the portrayal of the Jews in the popular media through clips of TV shows, movies and music, activities led and planned by the BESSY Board, and a panel discussion featuring Comedian and NPR Correspondent Aaron Freeman, Chicago Tribune Entertainment Reporter Mark Caro, our own Rabbi London, and more. Hundreds of Jews from all of the youth groups in Chicagoland were invited, including NFTY, BBYO, USY, NCSY, and more. The event was also promoted through the Jewish Student Union’s Israel clubs throughout public high schools in Chicago and on the North Shore. I had personal connections to people on at least three of the regional executive boards of the different youth groups, and I promoted and pitched the program to them. Plenty of people liked the idea, some said they would come, but when it came down to the day, only about 20-30 people gathered here at Beth Emet, the majority of them coming from BESSY. We were still able to have an amazing program, but it was not quite the same as it would have been with 50-100 people.
So, what went wrong? Maybe we chose a bad date and time, as it was so close to Winter Vacation, and kids were scrambling to finish up projects. We tried to pick a topic that appealed to everyone–after all, what teen doesn’t like pop culture? (or at least doesn’t enjoy some form of film, TV, or music?).
When I first had the idea to have a symposium for Jewish youth, I planned to focus it on Israel, not unlike an AIPAC Conference or a Club Israel event. But, as the BESSY Board was planning the event, we turned to a non-Israel topic, encroaching on territory that hadn’t really been explored before. Maybe, through this experience, we learned WHY it hadn’t been done before, as it was not as huge a success as it should have been. We were missing the key aspect that seems to bring Jews together: ISRAEL.
The main organization in Chicago that tries to bring Jewish teenagers from different denominations together is Club Israel and the JCRC/Hillel Initiative. Although they haven’t had an AMAZING track record, they have had some hit events, like the Idan Raichel concert that took place earlier this year. Two years ago, Club Israel had the first Israelity conference, and this year they were going to sponsor an Israelity event with Elie Wiesel, but it was changed to a Yom HaZikaron ceremony and Yom HaAtzmaout celebration. During the ceremony, members from the leadership of the different youth groups participated, and at least a hundred teenagers filled the theater at the JCC. Afterwards, we were treated to a Middle-Eastern dinner from Taboun.
The success of this event is testimony that the different groups CAN get together and produce something wonderful. But once you leave the realm of Israel, all hope is lost. A few years back, the regional president of CHUSY (or Chicago) Region USY gave a speech at the Walk with Israel introducing her new organization, JUCY: Jewish United Chicago Youth. The goal of this organization was to bring together and UNITE Jews from different denominations. There was no point in arguing about the different youth groups and about which one was better. Jews should be allowed to be different and take pride in their own groups, but they also need to take pride in the Jewish people as a whole.
Although it is easy for me to identify with these ideas, as someone who doesn’t like to categorize himself into “one” group, but that fact does not make these statements any less true. If kids are bickering about these things, then there is no question that adults are also having trouble uniting as one–except around the topic of Israel.
Unfortunately, JUCY fell apart, leaving cross-denomination and youth group programming up to the JCRC/Hillel Initiative and Club Israel. Don’t get me wrong. I have great love for Israel and don’t have a huge problem with there being citywide Israel programs for Jewish teens. What I do have a problem with, though, is that these types of programs are the ONLY programs that are bringing together Jewish teens. By uniting on the issue of Israel, it is almost as if we are “ignoring” the problem. Yes, we may all love Israel–but do we really all love each other?
The Talmud states that “kol Yisrael aravim zeh bazeh”, all Israel is responsible for one another. As Jews, we cannot afford to have unnecessary conflicts between the different denominations. We may not always agree with everything the other group believes in, but this is no reason for us not to accept each other. Over the past two summers, I have participated in two unique programs that deal with Jewish pluralism. During both of the programs I have met amazing people, from all over the world, who have graced the Jewish spectrum-ranging from those who don’t believe in God to those who are “ultra-Orthodox”. At Genesis at Brandeis University and on Nesiya, I have learned how to be in communities where people accept others for who they are. Next year, I hope to participate in another pluralistic program, Kivunim: New Directions, where we not only explore the communities in Israel. Every few weeks we will take trips around the world to visit other Jewish communities. These are not just programs where we say, “Hey, I like you and you like me”; they’re programs where we talk about the problems between us, with the goal of gaining increased awareness and acceptance.
This is is definitely a positive step toward the uniting of the Jewish people, but more can be done. I am not quite sure what the complete solution is, but as our class quote says, “Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced”. It may take time for Jews to catch on, but if we don’t start somewhere, then we won’t get anywhere.

Shabbat Shalom.

Final College Essay- Nesiya Final Project

2006-11-05T14:58:00.000-08:00

Before the end of the Nesiya Summer Kehilla Experience in Israel, each participant and staff member must complete and present a final project. Although some people knew exactly what they wanted to do as the last week approached, I had absolutely no clue. To begin the process, I met with Avigail, the Digital Media artist, and decided that the word “change” would be my theme. Avigail then suggested that I sit down and write about change, in order to brainstorm ideas. I went back to my room, took out a notebook and, deviating completely from Avigail’s suggestions, wrote down the words “memory” and “change”–in Hebrew and English–until they completely filled the page. Although the word drawing didn’t contain much substance, the exercise provided me with time to think about the words I was writing down. I tried to find a connection between memory and change–something along the lines of changing memories or the memory of change. Logically, these ideas would be represented with pictures, one of the best ways to preserve memories. I also thought about using words in conjunction with the pictures. Aside from the drawing, though, nothing else came to mind.
The next day, I met again with Avigail, but I still had no clear direction for my project. She told me to recall a memory from the summer, so that I could focus on a subject. I chose the Noded, the three-day desert-survival hike that began the program. The word noded in Hebrew means “wandering”, and for the majority of the summer I was wandering through the land of Israel–literally and figuratively. This idea of wandering became the new focus of my project and caused me to contemplate my personal transformations during the summer. I then set out to create a collection of artifacts from the summer–and the surroundings–using the theme of noded.
When I was finished, my collection included the word drawing, photos from the hike and the desert, sand and rocks, a poem about the desert, and an essay that I wrote about wandering. On the third day of the planning, the artists offered me some final words of advice–to create a three-dimensional display–then left me to complete my project. Looking back, I realize that the departure of the artists expedited my work.
Even today, I don’t know exactly how to describe my final project to others. Saying that it was a combination of personal artifacts, photography, layout, and writing doesn’t reflect its deep complexity. Although I am extremely satisfied with the end result, it is the long process, technically only three days, but in reality six weeks, that I will ultimately remember. While it is nice to have a clear plan, and to know exactly what you are doing and where you are going, this project made me understand that sometimes it’s beneficial to take a step back and just wander through life–with an open mind, heart, and soul.

College Essay 1- Nesiya Final Project- TAKE TWO

2006-10-15T15:24:00.000-07:00

Before the end of the Nesiya Summer Kehilla Experience in Israel, each participant and staff member must complete and present a final project. Although some people knew exactly what they wanted to do as the last week approached, I had absolutely no clue. To begin the process, I met with Avigail, the Digital Media artist, and decided that the word “change” would be my theme. Avigail then suggested that I sit down and write about change, in order to brainstorm ideas. I went back to my room, took out a notebook and, deviating completely from Avigail’s suggestions, wrote down the words “memory” and “change”–in Hebrew and English–until they completely filled the page. Although the word drawing didn’t contain much substance, the exercise provided me with time to think about the words I was writing down. I tried to find a connection between memory and change–something along the lines of changing memories or the memory of change. Logically, these ideas would be represented with pictures, one of the best ways to preserve memories. I also thought about using words in conjunction with the pictures. Aside from the drawing, though, nothing else came to mind.
The next day, I met again with Avigail, but I still had no clear direction for my project. She told me to recall a memory from the summer, so that I could focus on a subject. I chose the Noded, the three-day desert-survival hike that began the program. The word noded in Hebrew means “wandering”, and for the majority of the summer I was wanding through the land of Israel–literally and figuratively. This idea of wandering became the new focus of my project and caused me to contemplate my transformations during the summer. I then set out to create a collection using the theme of noded.
When I was finished, my collection included the word drawing, photos from the hike and the desert, sand and rocks, a poem about the desert, and an essay that I wrote about wandering. On the third day of the planning, the artists gave me final words of advice–to create a three-dimensional display–then left me to complete my project. Looking back, I realize that the artists’ departures expedited my work (?).
Ultimately, I was able to use my photography, layout, and writing skills to complete a visual and substantial project. I didn’t know how to describe it to others, but that was a reflection of its complexity. Although I was extremely satisfied with the end result, it is the long process, technically only three days, but in reality six weeks, that I will ultimately remember. Creating this project made me understand that spontaneity is necessary and that sometimes it’s beneficial to take a step back and just wander through life.

College Essay 1- Nesiya Final Project- Draft

2006-09-21T19:24:00.000-07:00

Even though I knew that I would have to complete a final project by the end of the Nesiya Institute’s Summer Kehilla Experience in Israel, I was still dreading it as the last week of the program approached. When I thought of the final project, people doing interpretive dance routines, playing guitar, or showing off a piece of art came to my mind. Throughout the six-week program I learned that digital media and photography was also an option, but I was still clueless as to what I was going to present in front of my group and how I was going to create something all by myself. When the projects were officially introduced, the staff emphasized the fact that although a finished project is important, it is the process that matters. My friends and I looked upon this with skepticism, but by the end, after undergoing a process of my own, I knew that this was truly the case.
To start off the process, I met with the Digital Media artist, because that was what I was most comfortable with, and we decided upon the word “change”, which came from a brainstorming activity the day before. She then suggested that I go sit somewhere and write about change. I went back to my room, but I did not use any of the techniques suggested. Instead, I took out a notebook and began writing the words “memory” and “change”–in Hebrew and English–until they completely filled the page. Although there was not much substance, this exercise provided me with time to think about the words I was writing down.
The next day, I met again with the artists (this time the Drama artist was also advising) and we tried to solidify a subject by having me recall a specific memory from the summer to focus on. I chose the Noded, or the three-day desert-survival hike that was the start to the program. However, the word noded also means wandering, so this became the main focus of my project. The artists then sent me on a mission to collect anything I could that related to noded.
When I was finished, my collection included the sketch from the first day, a photograph from the desert hike, more photographs that I took in Ein Gedi, sand and rocks, a poem about the desert by a famous Israeli actor, and an essay that I wrote on the subject of wandering. On the third day of the planning, the artists gave me some final advice–to create a kind of three-dimensional display–then left me to complete the project by myself. I got right to work, partly because time was running also but also because there was no other option. I took some materials from the art room and began creating the display–with help from a few friends. As I began to think about the presentation of the project, I realized that something was missing. Because the trip consisted of both Israelis and Americans, everything was said in both languages. Although I used some Hebrew during the program, I did not speak as much as I would have liked to. Due to this, I decided to translate my essay (with some help) into Hebrew and to read it in both languages during my presentation. This act was greatly appreciated, and I was complemented on “bringing out the Hebrew” by a fellow participant.
I did not use music; I did not use dance or painting. I did use my skills of photography, layout, and writing to produce a project that was visually appealing, yet full of substance. It was difficult to describe to people when they asked, “What was your project?”, but I was okay with that because it reflected the complexity of the project that started from a simple word–change. It also did not bother me if people did not completely understand the project, because at its heart, the project was about the process. Although I was extremely satisfied with my end result, it is the long process, technically only three days but in reality six weeks, that I will remember for time to come.

AP Euro Summer Assignment

2006-08-28T19:52:00.000-07:00

Over the course of a few hundred years, the Roman Catholic Church went from a small institution to being, essentially, the most important power in Western Europe. Although it faced small problems, it was not until the 1300s when it came against some serious issues challenging its supremacy. During the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Renaissance, from 1300-1600, Western Europe dealt with theological, external, and social issues that challenged and had an impact on the Catholic Church.
The Roman Catholic Church was the center of life for most people living at the end of the Middle Ages. The word of the Church, usually direct from the Vatican in Rome, was unequivocal. No one dared oppose the church for fear of excommunication, or, even worse, death. Yet, because of the Holy See’s dictatorial manner, there were those, like John Wyclif, Nicolaus Copernicus, and King Henry VIII, who spoke out and took a stand for what they believed in, even if excommunications were to be in their futures.
One could say that John Wycliff believed in the modern-day concept of “separation of church and state.” He wrote that “papal claims of temporal power had no foundation in the Scriptures, and that the Scriptures alone should be the standard of Christian belief and practice” (McKay 386). Wyclif, like many others, was tired of the Church having control of everything and performing practices that were not so sacred. He also believed that everyone should read (and interpret) the Bible for him or herself. Although his ideas were condemned by those in power, he acquired many followers who took the name “Lollards”. Wyclif also influenced the publication of an English translation of the Bible. Many say that Wyclif and his ideas were the precursor to Luther’s later Protestant Reformation.
According to William Manchester, everyone at the end of the Middle Ages knew that “the world was an immovable disk around which the sun revolved, and that that rest of the cosmos comprised heaven, which lay dreamily above the skies, inhabited by cherubs, and hell, flaming deep beneath the European soil” (89). Therefore, how could the earth possibly be rotating around the sun, as Nicolaus Copernicus suggested? It just did not make sense to people. Many in Copernicus’s time disagreed with him, for three main reasons. The first group of people to speak out against Copernicus and his ideas was, surprisingly, not the Catholic Church but the leaders of the Protestant movement. Martin Luther and John Calvin both ardently opposed Copernicus’s teachings. They used quotes from the Bible saying that the earth is the body that is immobile, not the sun. Afterwards, the Church did get involved in the movement against Copernicus, although it was not really until after Copernicus died, which is also when his book, De revolutionibus, was more prominently published. The first argument the Church had against Copernicus was more practical. Because heaven and hell were above and below Earth, respectively, a rotating Earth could not be possible, because then there really could not be a “heaven” and a “hell”, which, according to the Church, definitely existed. The second gripe the Holy See had with Copernican theory was more serious, as it brought Gd into question. Although it was not directly because of Copernicus that this issue became prevalent, it still had a closely related to his writings. Giordano Bruno, who declared that a rotating Earth was an indisputable fact, was accused with saying that Gd was immanent in the world, rather than transcendent. The Church believed that Bruno was placing Gd as a part of creation, instead of as a being, or deity, superior to it (Manchester 91). As a result, the Church banned Catholics from reading Copernicus’s work and executed Bruno (as Copernicus was long dead). Although the Church did not protest Copernicus at first, once it realized the impact he could have on its power, it took serious steps to prevent to censor and silence Copernican theory.
The third example of someone who wanted to reform and change the beliefs of the church was someone very much unlike the two previous men. First of all, King Henry VIII was a monarch, and, from 1509, the supreme ruler of England. Secondly, Henry wanted to reform the church for a very practical reason, and basically for something that would affect, at least at first, only him. The monarch had only one problem with the Catholic Church: he wanted to divorce his wife and it would not let him. King Henry had been married to Catherine of Aragon (daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella) for eighteen years, but she had not provided him with a male heir. Their only child, Mary, had been betrothed to future king of France, so Henry was afraid that if he did not have a son, then England would become part of France when the king was crowned. Henry had also been seeing, and had fallen in love with, Anne Boleyn, whom he selected as his next wife. Unfortunately for the King, divorce was not allowed in Catholicism–at least without the Pope’s permission. Since Henry was a devout Catholic, he brought the matter to the Vatican, and, under normal conditions, it probably would have been accepted since there was a flaw in Henry’s marriage to Catherine. Catherine had also been Henry’s brother’s wife, and, according to English canon, it was forbidden to marry your brother’s wife. So, now the pope had a reason annul the marriage, which really should not have happened in the first place. But, there was someone around with more influence than the pope–the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. It so happened to be that Catherine was his aunt, making Mary his cousin. If the marriage was to be anulled, then Mary would become illegitimate, and Catherine would be reduced to something like a concubine. Charles did not want these things to happen, so he tried to prevent the pope from allowing the divorce. Charles did not quite realize, though, that Henry was “a man of immense determination” and would not stop at anything from getting his way. So, in 1533, Henry married Anne, anyways, and was immediately excommunicated. Because he wanted a son, and because the son had to have been born by a queen to be an heir to the throne, Henry created his own church, appointed Thomas Cranmer archbishop of Canterbury, and had Cranmer marry the two and then appoint Anne as Queen. Parliament passed, in 1534, the Acts of Succession and Supremacy, bringing England under the Anglican Church. The King had officially broken ties with Rome and the Holy See.
The people of the Renaissance did not only experience threats from within–there were also many external threats, such as conflicts between monarchs and the Black Death. One of the most famous monarchial disputes was the Hundred Years’ War, which took place from 1337-1453. England and France had been fighting, on and off, for years about control of land and claims to the throne. This particular war erupted over the seizure of Aquitaine by the French monarch, Philip VI. The war, though, also dealt with King Edward’s claim to the French throne, as he was the grandson of the previous monarch, Philip the Fair. The war become complicated, at first, because many in France sided with Edward, not Philip. But, by the end, France was able to unite and overtake England, which was only left with a single French town (under its control) after the war. Even though there was great devastation after the war–destroyed lands in France and huge debts in England–both countries emerged relatively strong and united, due to their utter hatred of the other nation. “Both Philip VI and Edward III drummed up support for the war by portraying the enemy as an alien, evil people” (McKay 383). England also became more united under the Parliament, which met frequently during and after the war, as the King needed its consent to tax the people. Even though the wars threatened Europe’s stability, they also were somewhat successful in unification efforts.
The second external threat Western Europe experienced in the late Middle Ages was the Black Death. Also known as the Bubonic Plague, it managed to eliminate a significant amount of Europe’s population. Unfortunately, because the population records did not exist prior to the Death, it is difficult to determine the exact number of people affected (McKay 376). Starting in Genoa, Italy, in 1347, the plague spread to Germany, France, England, and the rest of Italy by rats on ships. Once the rats were in the cities, they spread the disease through fleas carrying the plague, and sometimes it spread just from person-to-person contact. Two other factors that helped spread the plague were poor hygiene and insufficient medical knowledge. One result of the plague was the establishment of many new hospitals throughout Europe. Although at the time they could not treat the disease, the hospitals tried to comfort patients, who were likely to die, anyways. “England and many parts of Europe suffered from overpopulation in the early fourteenth century. Population losses caused by the Black Death ‘led to increased productivity by restoring a more efficient balance between labour, land, and capital’” (McKay 376). Because there were less people but still work to be done, people were able to make more money and wages increased. The plague also affected discrimination in society. Although antisemitism existed before the Black Death broke out, many blamed the Jews for spreading the deadly disease, and many Jews were executed. In just a few years, the entire European society had changed because of a single outside force.
One of the most important inventions of the Renaissance was the printing press, which caused many social changes on Western European society, and to Western European Christians, in particular. In 1448, Johannes Gutenberg moved to Mainz, Germany and created the first printing press, which used movable type. Until this time, the Church had essentially controlled all printing and publications in the Western world. With Gutenberg’s invention, anyone could now print their own work and mass distribute it. “Gutenberg had built a bonfire in Mainz, and printers throughout Christendom flocked to kindle their torches from it” (Manchester 96). Even though there was a large percent of the population that was illiterate, the Church was still very afraid by this development because people–Copernicus, for example–could now print their beliefs, whether or not they were in agreement with the ideas of the Holy See. The invention of the press also led people to become more literate, and once they were able to read the Bible, they could come up with their own interpretation of things and not have to rely on the Church for direction. Ideas like John Wycliff’s were greatly supported by Gutenberg’s invention.
A second social change experienced by Western Europe connects both with the invention of the press, popularizing printed literature, and with the strong nationalistic feelings that were arising throughout Europe. Throughout the Middle Ages, people spoke–and wrote–according to the class they belonged to. Peasants and common folk usually spoke in local dialects, while upperclassmen spoke in a language like French or Latin. The same was true for the literature and publications. By the end of the Middle Ages, though, people began speaking and writing according to where they were from–people living in England spoke English, people living in France spoke French, and people living in Italy spoke Italian. “Three masterpieces of European culture, Dante’s Divine Comedy, Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, and Villion’s Grand Testament, brilliantly manifest this new national pride” (McKay 394). Unfortunately for the Church, this was not such a welcome development. Rome wanted all Christians to speak the same language–Latin–so that Christendom would be unified, and that all Christians could communicate with each other easily (Manchester 97). While the adoption of the vernacular does not necessarily display that people were unhappy or unsatisfied with the Church, it did show that people cared about having a national identity and having some control over their own lives.