Theology and Science in the Thought of Francis Bacon

[Guest Ryan Murtha]

I just discovered this 2008 book by Steven Matthews, wish I'd known of it earlier. It's a bit expensive ($40 for the ebook) but it's excellent. For those who regard Bacon as a prophet and are curious about his theological views, it would be the definitive work, I imagine.

https://www.amazon.com/Theology-Science-Thought-Francis-Bacon/dp/0754662527

[Light-of-Truth]

It is a topic that I've been aware of on several levels since I became a Baconian. Honestly the scope goes wide, from way out there to very reasonable.

Think about it, "Born to a Virgin, the Bringer of Light" and so on. Which so much is true. A story Dee and Elizabeth contrived? Somewhat, maybe, in my opinion. But also Bacon was the one person who could be Bacon, Shakespeare, and the born King of England in one lifetime? Nobody else, since. Some believe he has always been and will always be. I'm in the middle. He was born to be who he was, on some level he is still here today.

I haven't seen this book, but will say Peter Dawkins talks about Bacon's philosophies on many levels, including mystical. Peter Dawkins shaped my opinion of Bacon early on since the 1990s.

Recently found this page on his website full of essays I have not read yet.

https://www.fbrt.org.uk/essays/

Ryan, did you read it? "Theology and Science in the Thought of Francis Bacon"

Can you share a thought or two?

[Lawrence Gerald]

https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/kSp6XnHw7AQC?hl=en&gbpv=1

[Lawrence Gerald]

Ryan if interested after reading this excerpt from Mathews book, would you consider doing an interview with him for sirbacon? if so here's Steven Mathews email  smatthew@umn.edu

[Guest Ryan Murtha]

2 hours ago, Lawrence Gerald said:

Ryan if interested after reading this excerpt from Mathews book, would you consider doing an interview with him for sirbacon? if so here's Steven Mathews email  smatthew@umn.edu

I'd love to if he responds, I sent him an email but academics have to walk a fine line with this subject, there are serious taboos because of the whole Shakespeare thing. For example with the Anti-Machiavel, I found scholars dropping definite hints (Sydney Anglo, Nigel Bawcutt and Oona-Alis Zaharia), especially Bawcutt shows serious impatience with the book's obscurity, but they have never responded to my inquiries or when I later sent them my work on it. It's quite funny what Bawcutt wrote:

Quote

Now it might be helpful to scholars if it could be conclusively proved that they need not bother to read Gentillet’s long and sometimes tedious book, but unfortunately this is not the case, and one of the points to be made in this article is that scholars who are ignorant of Gentillet may fail to recognize allusions to him if they should encounter them.

That's as far as he could go, he's afraid to say anything explicit even though he's getting up there and must be near retirement, he might be emeritus but he would seriously offend his colleagues if he said too much, I guess. I'll be back after I finish reading the book, this guy really has a serious knowledge of the religious situation at the time, I'm learning a lot.