“No institution is firm or lasting if it rests on man’s strength alone. History and reason combine to show that the roots of all great institutions are to be found outside this world…Sovereignties, in particular possess strength, unity, stability, only to the degree to which they are sanctified by religion.”
This quote details the significance of religion in the political world. Machiavelli’s The Prince was written in Italy, during a time period that witnessed an unstable political system. Towards the end of the 15th century, the Popes had a large involvement in politics; an endeavor at which they were not particularly honorable. They made alliances with the Italian city-states, put their own families in political positions, and were involved in assassination attempts. The Popes professed “eternal law” which was a divine system that defined the nature of the universe. Similarly, they believed in “natural law”, which was basically eternal law as it related to humans- their ultimate purpose in life, given to them by God. Politics were viewed simply as a way to expand on and implement these spiritual beliefs, implying that rulers were representations of God on earth, or were selected by a divine right. The quote alludes to these beliefs, stating that for a government and ruler to be successful, religion and God must bless them. Machiavelli was one of the first to depart from the idea of politics as nothing more than an instrument in the plan of God. He was concerned with defining power, and expressing his idea that politics should be seen as an activity in its own right. He is an exponent of humanism, which is defined by the Cambridge International Dictionary as “a belief system based on the principle that people’s spiritual and emotional needs can be fulfilled without following a religion.” He feels that politics should deal with facts rather than with abstractions; he is interested in the present state of man, rather than the religious ideal. He believes in an extreme separation of church and state, which was an opinion that did not win him much favor among the religious.
It cannot be denied that religion has an influence over the way a government functions. Machiavelli examines these various ideas concerning the role of religion and principalities in his book, The Prince. He believes that it is good to encourage morality and religious principles among the people. He thinks that these are necessary factors for keeping the people productive and obedient. He even stated that the religiously ruled Ecclesiastical principalities are desired, for the laws of religion already govern their people, and are therefore less subject to mutiny or civil disobedience. However, while Machiavelli is in favor of religion on part of the people, it seems he views it more as a mere tool than as a true institution of faith. He looks upon religion as a tool that could be utilized to keep the public from becoming unruly, since religion tends to constantly strike the fear of damnation into its followers. Supporting the idea of Machiavelli’s callous view of religion is the fact that he feels the ruler himself has no obligation to live by the same religious ethics as does his people. The ruler is above such things as religion, morality, and even good and evil. Machiavelli promotes such religiously unsanctioned methods as the use of cruelty, deceit or even murder, as long as they are used intelligently and secretly enough to have results beneficial to the user. As Machiavelli wrote, “…in the actions of all men, and especially of princes, where there is no court to appeal to, one looks to the end. So let a prince win and maintain his state; the means will always be judged honorable”. In other words, the end justifies the means; if a prince can gain power and maintain his state to the fullest, he will always be praised and rewarded, and the methods used to gain his power, however dubious they may be, become null and void. In fact, Machiavelli writes, “…it is not necessary for a prince to have all the above-mentioned [ethical] qualities in fact, but it is indeed necessary to appear to have them. Nay, dare I say this, that by having them and always observing them, they are harmful; and by appearing to have them, they are useful as it is to appear merciful, faithful, humane, religious…”. With this quote, Machiavelli expresses his opinion that it is not only acceptable for a ruler to demonstrate immoral tactics to gain power, once he is in power, moral attributes such as ethics, humanity and even religion are not only unnecessary, but harmful.
Machiavelli believes that though religion can indeed serve to unify a prince and his people, in opposition it can also nullify some of the prince’s power, for “…many have held and hold the opinion that worldly things are so governed by fortune and by God, that men cannot correct them with their prudence, indeed that they have no remedy at all; and on account of this they might judge that one need not sweat much over things but let oneself be governed by chance”. In other words, at times people’s extreme faith in God and an uncontrollable fate leads to a loss of personal ambition, and subsequently to a loss of free will. Machiavelli believes that the risk of this religious downfall is far too great, and therefore he proposes that religion and politics should be held as completely separate entities. Religion should be held in the hand of God, whereas politics should be held in the hands of men. He believes that politics could be completely separated from all other behaviors, and looked upon as self sufficient. However it may seem, this ‘separation of powers’ is not done with the intention to help preserve religious integrity by freeing it from the corruption of politics. Rather Machiavelli wishes nothing more for the prince than to acquire power and maintain his principalities. He attempts to create a political order in this world, the here and now, and has no time for patience for the things “…found outside this world…” such as God and heaven. Naturally, these beliefs were challenged by religious politicians and writers, who felt that such attitudes undermine morality and religious veracity.
Machiavelli states that two fundamentals needed for a prince to be efficient are virtu and fortuna, the latter referring to unpredictable fortune, while the former refers to the prince’s cunning and abilities. Religious ideals seem to play no part in his philosophies, unlike most Greek, Roman and Hebrew thinkers of the time. They saw no real distinction between religion and politics, as kings were believed to be the human embodiment of God. Under Machiavelli’s ideal rule, the purpose of government would no longer be to help shape the souls of its citizens, nor would it be to provide a paradigm of morality. Rather, the purpose of government would be a state where the people could exercise their basic requirements for happiness; these being refuge, self-protection, and general well-being. This goes to the idea of preserving free will, and the thought that religion tends to smother such independent thought and self-determination. Machiavelli states “…one sees by experience in our times that the princes who have done great things are those who take little account of faith and have known how to get around men’s brains with their astuteness…. Religion’s basic function is to present the people with the notion that if they behave properly, they might find salvation. Because of this, religion can be a very controlling entity, one that a clever ruler could manipulate to his advantage. This is precisely why Machiavelli views faith as a device used to exploit and control his people. He presents the notion that to a ruler, religion is much more useful as a municipal tool, rather than a moral one.
In The Prince, Machiavelli also writes that above anyone else, a prince should not let himself be governed by morality. He writes, “a prudent lord, therefore, cannot observe faith, nor should he, when such observance turns against him, and the causes that made him promise have been eliminated”. He believes that the last thing a nation would want or need would be to have a state ruled by priests, comparable to the one Moses concocted. In fact, Machiavelli believes it necessary that a prince not even aid religious leaders. He gives an example when he writes of King Louis, “But no sooner was he in Milan than he did the contrary by giving aid to Pope Alexander...Nor did he notice that with this decision he was weakening himself…making the Church great by adding so much temporal greatness to the spiritual one that gives it so much authority”. With this passage in the book, Machiavelli explains that a ruler who decides to give support to a religious institution takes power away from himself. Many citizens who had before depended solely upon the prince for comfort and wisdom would now have another option to run to for help- a new, more powerful church. Also, by giving aid to the Pope. a prince decides to help increase the authority of a man who is in a similar position to himself. Such actions definitely do not fit with Machiavelli’s idea of a separate government. Machiavelli believes that a prince must be selfish, almost miserly with his power. His key to becoming politically successful is to simply develop an acute ability to gain and maintain power, and to use whatever methods necessary to attain his goal. Machiavelli writes “…it is necessary to a prince, if he wants to maintain himself, to learn to be able to not be good, and to use this and not use it according to necessity”. A prince who wants to be successful must not confuse the ideas of morality with the ideas of power. If a ruler desires one of these, the other must surely be sacrificed.
The opening quote holds great political import by detailing the notions of eternal and natural law that were rampant during Machiavelli’s times. However, based on his writings in The Prince, it is clear the Machiavelli would certainly reject the substance if this quote, as it is the polar opposite of the humanistic view, which he advocated. Machiavelli does not accept the idea that inherent religion is a necessary factor for principalities. He also believes that a state can “rest on man’s strength alone”, as long as that man is the ruler described in his book. In summation, to quote the 20th century essayist Sir Isaiah Berlin, “to advocate ideal measures suitable only for angels, as previous religious writers seem to Machiavelli too often to have done, is visionary and irresponsible, and leads to ruin.”
