15 On philosophy (1536) CR XI, 278–84
15 On philosophy (1536)
CR XI, 278–84
Oration on philosophy, held when conferring the degree of Master to some learned and honourable young men. Philip Melanchthon, 15361
I hope that my character is sufficiently familiar and well known to all of you so that I can easily convince you that I have not taken on the office of speaking again out of impudence, or confidence in my intellect or meddlesomeness of any kind. For it was because it was allotted to me by that excellent man, Jakob Milich, the dean of our college, who is most dear to me because of his outstanding virtue, and because of our fellowship in studying and many duties, that I was moved by the motive of duty to obey my friend's wish. I am not to such an extent a Suffenus,2 nor so ridiculously taken with myself as to be unaware that there are many in this university who are both more suitable by their personality, and better prepared for speaking with erudition than I am, and truly I give them plentiful praise for their intellect and erudition. However, I did not want to appear capricious, since a great friend solicits this duty from me. Indeed, I do not want to make excuses any longer, for I believe that my character is sufficiently approved of by you. And they are mainly of the kind where this little verse is appropriate: Tropos esth' ho peithōn tou legontos, ou logos, which means that the speaker's character, not his speech, convinces the audience [Menander, Fragment 407.7].
It is established with excellent judgement that on these festive occasions there is a speech either about studies or in praise of the virtues. Therefore, in order to contribute a topic appropriate to this occasion, and to say something about the merit and usefulness of the arts which philosophy professes, I have set up an oration in which I shall demonstrate that the Church has need of liberal education, and not only of knowledge of grammar, but also of the skill of many other arts and of philosophy. Since we have established this, even if other subjects present themselves for discussion, good minds must nevertheless give attention mainly and most zealously to the purpose of applying their studies to supporting and honouring the Church; for to the good nothing must be sweeter than the name of the Church, and
1 As Dean of the arts faculty, Melanchthon presided over the promotion of Masters in January 1536.
2 Suffenus is a character ridiculed as a bad poet in Catullus, Poems, 14. 19: cf. Erasmus, Adages, II.v.12.
nothing dearer than it. This reason must encourage and incite us most to strive, with the greatest exertion of our minds, for perfect knowledge, from which some benefit for the state or the Church may derive. Indeed, for us professors no oration on another subject is worthier, nor is there anything more useful for those who are good and devoted to learning than to contemplate in their minds the aim and the goal of the most honourable course to which they must relate their efforts.
With regard to these things, the merit and power of the arts themselves cannot be observed better in any other way than when we see how much need there is for them in the Church, with how much darkness ignorance overwhelms religion, and how much devastation, what fearful destruction of churches, and how much savageness and confusion of the entire human race it brings about. If anyone considers these things, then he can indeed esteem the great power and dignity of the arts and of doctrine.
Although no oration can be devised that is a match for such great things, nevertheless the young – because base conjectures on this matter are often propagated by the inexperienced – need to be admonished and reassured that, although it is discussed by the teachers in the schools daily, nevertheless the oration held in this place on behalf of the state must have more authority. For it is the common judgement of all the most learned men in this assembly, which it would be extremely insolent to spurn. Therefore, as I shall be saying things both necessary for the state and beneficial for you, and as this my voice sets out the common judgement of all, I ask you to listen to me diligently because of your humanity, and to be warned not only to flee the foolish judgements of those who do not believe that the Church needs liberal education at all, just as the companions of Ulysses sailed past the Sirens with their ears plugged [Odyssey XII.158ff.], but also to execrate those people themselves like the most loathesome pests and fearful monsters. Moreover, it should sharpen and arouse the concern for learning that your studies are relevant to the Church and the state, and not only private benefit is sought from them.
Altogether the most prevalent in an Iliad of ills3 is ignorant theology. For it is a miscellaneous teaching, in which the great things are not explained clearly, things that should be separated are mingled together, and on the other hand those that nature claims should be joined are pulled apart; often contradictory things are said, and things that are merely similar are seized
3 ‘Ilias malorum’ signifies the simultaneous occurrence of great catastrophes. For classical sources for this phrase, see Erasmus, Adages, I.iii.26.
in preference to those that are true and proper. Finally, the entire teaching is monstrous, and similar to the painting in Horace: ‘If the painter chose to join a human head to the neck of a horse, and to spread feathers of many a hue’4 [Art of Poetry I.If.]. Nothing in it is consistent, and neither the beginning nor the progress nor the conclusion can be discerned. Such a teaching cannot fail to produce endless scattering and endless dispersion [Cicero, Republic II.4.7], because in such a confusion each one understands something different, and, while each defends his own dream, there are struggles and discord. In the meantime the wavering conscience is forsaken. And since no Furies torture the mind more violently than this doubt about religion, finally all of religion is cast aside in hatred, and their minds become impious and Epicurean.
Since, therefore, ignorant theology has so many ills, it is easy to judge that the Church has need of many great arts. For in order to judge and to explain correctly and distinctly complicated and obscure things, it is not sufficient to know the common precepts of grammar and dialectic, but varied knowledge is needed; for many things are to be taken from natural philosophy, and many are to be contributed to Christian teaching from moral philosophy.
Furthermore, there are two things for the acquiring of which great and varied knowledge and long practice in many arts are necessary, namely method and style of discourse. For no one can become a master of method, unless he is well and rightly versed in philosophy – indeed in that one kind of philosophy that is alien to sophistry, searches for and discloses truth properly and by the right path. Those who are well versed in these studies, and have obtained for themselves the habit (hexin) of relating to method everything that they want to understand or teach to others, also know how to represent methods in religious discussions, how to clear up what is complicated, pull together what is scattered and shed light on what is obscure and ambiguous.
Great and abundant knowledge is also needed for another purpose, namely for the shaping of a discourse, as all know who have occupied themselves even slightly with literature. No less study is needed in order to acquire this habit (hexin) of shaping method. It cannot be achieved by those who are not versed in most parts of philosophy. Those who have no practice in these would obtain only the shadow of method, even if they acquired
4 As translated by H. Rushton Fairclough in Horace, Satires, Epistles, Ars Poetica (Cambridge MA, 1978), p. 451.
dialectic. None produces what is corrupt and sophistic more often than these men. Whereas they consider themselves masters of method, they nevertheless stray from the path, and they are, to use the Homeric word, blind watchmen (alaoskopoi).5 Moreover, there is the need for philosophy not only because of method, or, as Plato calls it, inevitable rules for composition (anankēn logographikēn) [Phaedrus 264b7], but, as I said before, the theologian needs to adopt many things from natural philosophy, where the relation of the single parts is such that for those who strive for genuine knowledge it is not sufficient to choose a few aspects, but, as far as possible, the entire art needs to be known. The theologian who does not know of these most learned discussions on the soul, the senses, the causes of desires and emotions, on knowledge and on will, lacks a great tool. And he acts insolently who professes himself a dialectician if he is ignorant of those distinctions between causes that are only taught in natural philosophy and can only be understood by natural philosophers. Doubtless there is a cycle of arts by which they are all bound together and connected, so that in order to grasp individual ones many of the others have to be taken on. Therefore the Church has need of the entire cycle of sciences.
I do not believe that anyone is so foolish as not to notice that those who are versed in moral philosophy can practise more easily many parts of Christian doctrine. For if many things are similar, concerning laws, political morals, contracts and many of life's affairs, we are helped, not only by the order and method in philosophy, but also by understanding the things themselves carefully. If some things are dissimilar, then a comparison brings much light. Moreover, one who lacks a knowledge of natural philosophy practises moral philosophy like a lame man holding a ball.6 Again, history and the exact computation of time periods require mathematics, but that part also needs to be joined to natural philosophy, for from the former, as from a source, many things in natural philosophy take their origin. And it is a form of barbarity, to say nothing else, to spurn the most beautiful arts concerned with the motions of the constellations that bring about for us the distinction between the years and seasons, announce many great things that are to come, and warn us in a useful way.
I am not ignorant of the fact that philosophy is one kind of teaching and theology another, nor do I want to mingle them in such a way as a cook
5 The form alaoskopoi itself does not occur in Homer's works, but must refer to alaoskopiē, Iliad, X.515, meaning a blind man's watch; see also Erasmus, Adages, I.viii.41.
6 A lame man holding a ball refers to somebody who cannot make right use of a thing, as in Cicero, In Pisonem, XVIII.69.
mixes together many sauces [Plautus, Ghosts 1.3.120], but I want to help the theologian in the management of method. For he will need to borrow many things from philosophy. If anyone does not trust this oration, let him consider the theology of the ignorant, and let him ponder with himself if he wants to let loose on the world such miscellaneous sophistry, and wants doubtful theology to be brought upon the Church. By ignorant I mean not only those who are unskilled in letters, such as the Anabaptists,7 but also those impertinent men who, although they may declaim magnificently, nevertheless say nothing true, both because they are not used to the method, and because they do not grasp the origins of things sufficiently. Therefore, because they are not trained in philosophy, they do not understand sufficiently what theology professes, or to what extent it agrees with philosophy.
There is no need to recount here the ancients, who thoroughly overwhelmed Christian doctrine by the most foolish subtleties. I am searching for erudite philosophy, not the sophistries where there is nothing underneath. Therefore I said that one kind of philosophy has to be chosen which has as little as possible of sophistry and which preserves the true method; the teaching of Aristotle is of that kind. Nevertheless it still needs the addition, from elsewhere, of that most excellent part of philosophy that is concerned with the heavenly movements. For the other philosophical sects are full of sophistry and of absurd and false opinions, which are also harmful to the character. For the exaggerations of the Stoics, namely that good health, riches and similar things are not good, are altogether sophistic. Apatheia, too, a false and dangerous opinion on fate, is imaginary. Epicurus is not philosophising but being facetious when he asserts that everything exists by chance; he takes away the first cause, and disagrees in everything with the true teaching of the physicists. The Academy,8 too, is to be shunned, which does not preserve method, and takes an excessive licence to overturn everything; those who strive to do this must by necessity conclude many things in a sophistic way. However, he who follows mainly Aristotle as a guide, and aspires to one, simple and the least sophistic teaching, can now and then take on something from other authors, too. For, just as the Muses, when they competed in song with the Sirens and defeated them, made themselves crowns out of their feathers, so it is also with the philosophical sects: even if one is most recommendable, we nevertheless
7 For Anabaptists, see note 2, oration I, p. 5.
8 The Academy of Plato became renowned for its adherence to scepticism. See note 3, oration 9, p. 85.
now and then gather from others something true with which to embellish our opinion.
However, there will be occasion elsewhere to speak about the kinds of philosophy and the distinction between the sects. It seems to me that it also contributes to one's character to choose a sect that has the inclination to search for truth and not to disagree with it, and that loves moderate opinions and does not strive for the applause of the ignorant with tricks of reasoning and absurd opinions. This habit of seeking the applause of the unlearned is extremely bad, and those who bring it to the Holy Scriptures in truth cause great commotions there. The simple philosophy of which I am talking should first of all have the inclination not to assert anything without demonstration; thus it will easily escape absurd opinions, because they do not have demonstrations, but are only defended by sophistic tricks. Finally, on account of that, the knowledge of the Church is beneficial in general, because the ignorant are both more foolhardy and more heedless. Teaching puts a curb on oneself and accustoms one to diligence. For many things come to the mind of the erudite that are akin to the matter on which I have to pronounce: they see how easy it is to err and to be deceived, and they are accustomed from the other arts to seek for the sources of all matters, and to explain what appears to be opposed. And studies will be transformed into character; therefore the same diligence that is employed in inquiry creates modesty. Furthermore, it is evident what great danger foolhardiness and heedlessness bring, from examples of all ages and all states and in the Church itself, which has in the past been torn apart often by the thoughtless hastening of the ignorant, and is also being torn apart cruelly in our times.
Thus I first urge you, excellent listeners, to consider that your studies in truth concern the state and the Church, for the purity and harmony of teaching safeguard the welfare and harmony of men, and especially of the Church. Furthermore I entreat you, for the sake of the glory of God, which we must set before all other things, and for the sake of the welfare of the Church, which must be most dear to us, to resolve that the most excellent disciplines that philosophy contains are to be safeguarded, and to devote yourselves to them with greater effort, so that you may obtain for yourselves teaching that is genuine and useful for humankind.
When Epaminondas was asked what had been the most delightful thing to happen to him in his life, he replied that he derived the greatest pleasure from having freed his country from slavery while his parents were still alive,
having defeated the Spartans in a great battle [Plutarch, Moralia 1098A]. He bears witness that both had brought him the greatest pleasure, the salvation of his country and the joy that the virtue and glory of their victorious son brought to his parents. Would that we were disposed in such a way towards the Church that we considered it the greatest pleasure to see it flourishing and peaceful, which is more truly our home-country than the country and the home that received us at birth, and to take it upon ourselves that the Church – that is the heavenly angels and the entire assembly of the pious, whom one should revere and love like one's parents – may obtain genuine pleasure from our good deeds.
On the other hand, let us resolve that no torment is harsher than to see the Church dispersed, and the angels and the assembly of the pious thrown into mourning and grief by our desires. I am not speaking of rewards here, for we should be moved by virtue itself, and we need to hold dear the love of the Church and the regard for the duty that is due to God. However, for those who learn properly rewards will not be lacking, for God says: ‘For them that honour me I will honour’ [I Samuel 2:30]. If we are Christians, we have to do our duty in the hope that we may feel that God cares for us, so that we and our children be not needy. Indeed, you should know that it is because of our cause, and not that of the tyrants or of those who hate pious studies, that the entire nature of things is safeguarded by God: the sun rises and the changes of the seasons occur in order to make the fields fertile. The Stoics said rightly that all belongs to God, but that the philosophers are God's friends; therefore all belongs to the philosophers. So let us defend with great spirit the study of letters, and let us consider ourselves put in our position by divine providence, and because of that, let us do our duty with greater care, and let us expect the reward for our toils from God. I have spoken.