No More Learning

<»t the renewals of other Greek philosophers, the following are especially to be in. ntioned : —
JcMt Lips (1647-1606), Manuductio ad Stoicam Philosophiam (Antwerp, 1604),iind other writings ; and Caspar Schoppe, Elementa Stoicas Philosophies M'. rali. (Mainz, 1606).
DM, Sennert (1672-1637), Physica (Wittenberg, 1618); Sebastian Basso ( Philosophia . ' ttnralit adversus ArisUitelem, (Jeneva, 1621); and Johannes Magnenus, DM oeritus Itrviriscens (Pavia, 1646).
Claude de le^rigard as renewer of the Ionic natural philosophy in his CWwH Pitani ( L'dine, 1643 ff. ).
Pierre Oassendi (1592-1656), De Vita Moribus et Doctrina Epicuri (Ley- l«-n. 1647) [works, Lyons, 1668], and lastly
Kmanuel Maignanus (1601-1671), whose Cursus Philosophicus (Toulouse, ■lefends Kmpedoclean doctrines.
I"li»- ollowing wrote in the spirit of the ancient Scepticism: Michel de Montai-ne (1633-1692 ; Essais, Bordeaux, 1580, new editions, Paris, 1866, and Bordeaux, 1870) [Kng. tr. by Cotton, ed. by Hazlitt, Lond. 1872 ; also by Klorio, e«l by Morley, Lond. 1887], Francois Sanchez (1562-1632, a Portu guese wh > taught in Toulouse, author of the Tractatus de muttum nobili et prima uniremali scientia quod nihil scitur, Lyons, 1681 ; cf. L. (rerkrath, F. S. , Vienna, 1860), Pierre Charron (1641-1603; De la Sagesse, Bordeaux, 1601) : later Francois de la Motte le Vayer (1586-1672, Cinq Dialogues, Mons, 1673), Samuel Sorbiere (1615-1670, translator of Sextus Kmpiricus), and Simon Toucher (1644-96, author of a history of the Academic Sceptics, Paris, 1690).
The sha, pest polemic against Scholasticism proceeded from those Humanists who set agalTOl u me Koman eclectic popular pnuosopny W sound common
sense in an attractive lurln. anl EBB H
BB
«i»il. I ininnln is u> or mentioned here also, with his treatise De Intentions Dinlectica (1480).
Bffure him was Laurentiiis Va,l|a (1408-1467 ; Dialectics Disputationes contra AristoUleot, Veil! HOiM. Ladovjco Vlves (born in Valencia, 1492, died in Brugge, 1646; De Diseiplinis, Hriigge" 1631, works, Basel, 1666; cf. A. I-ange in Schmidt's Encyclopadie tier FMagogtib, Vol. IX. ), Marlus Nizolius (1498-1576; De veris principii* et vera ratinne philosophandi, Parma. 1653), finally Pierre de la Ramee (Petnis Kamus, 1516-1572, Institutions Dialer- tiar, Paris, 1543 ; cf. < h. Waddington, Paris, 1849 and 1866).
The tradition of Thomistic Scholasticism maintained itself most strongly at the Spanish universities. Among its supporters the most prominent was Francis Suarez of Granada (1648-1617 ; Disputationes Metaphysics , 1606, works, 26 vols. , Paris, 1856-66 ; cf. K. Werner, 8. und die Seholastik der Ulztm Jahrhundtrte. Regensburg, 1861) ; the collective work of the Jesuits of Coimbra, the so-called Collegium Conembricense, is also to be mentioned.
Protestantism stood from the beginning in closer relation to the humanistic movement. In Germany especially the two went frequently hand in hand ; cf. K. Hagen. Dcutschtands liltcrarisrhc und religiose Vei haltnisse im Refui ma UonMxeitalter. 3 vols. , Frankfort, 1868.
At the Protestant universities Aristoteltanism was introduced principally
"I ihi'imnni
356 The Renaissance: Humanistic Period. [Part IV.
by Philip Melancthon. In the edition of his works by Bretschneider and Bindseil the philosophical works form Vols. 13. and 16. Of chief importance among them are the text-books on logic (dialectic) and ethics. Cf. A. Ricbter, Af. 's Verdienste urn den philosophischen Unterricht (Leips. 1870); K. Hart- felder, M. als Praxeptor Germania: (Berlin, 1889).
Lather himself stood much nearer the position of Augustinianism (cf. Ch. Weisse, Die Christologie Luther's, Leips. 1852). This was still more the caae with Calvin, while Zwingli was friendlier inclined toward contemporaneous philosophy, especially the Italian Neo-Platonism. The scientific importance of all three great reformers lies, however, so exclusively In the theological field that they are to be mentioned here only as essential factors of the general intel lectual movement in the sixteenth century.
Protestant Aristotelianism found its opponents in Nicolaus Tauxellus (1647-1606, Professor in Basel and Altorf; Philosophic: Triumphus, Basel, 1673 ; Alpes Ccesce, Frankfort, 1697 ; cf. F. X. Schmidt-Schwarzenberg, N. 7", Der erste deittsche Philosoph, Erlangen, 1864), further in Socinianiam founded by Lelio Sozzini of Sienna (1526-1662) and his nephew Fausto (1639-1604 ; cf. A. Fock, Der Socinianismus, Kiel, 1847, and the article S. by Herzog in bis Theol. Enc, 2d ed. , XIV. 377 ff), and especially in the popular movement of Mysticism. Among the representatives of this movement are prominent Andreas Osiander (1498-1552), Caspar Scbwenckfeld (1490-1561), Sebas tian Franck (1500-1645; cf. K. Hagen, op. cit. , III. chap. 6) and especially Valentine Weigel (1663-1688 ; Libellus de Vita Beata, 1606, Der guldne Gnf, 1613, Vom Ort der Welt, 1613, Dialogus de Christianismo, 1614, TrwA <r*i-r6>. 1616 ; cf. J. O. Opel, V. W. , Leips. 1864).
The tendency toward natural philosophy in attachment to Nic. Cusanus appears more strongly in Charles BouilK (Bovillus, 1470-1663 ; De Intellect*
J. Dippel, Versuch einer system. Darstel- lung der Philos. des C. B. . WUrzburg, 1862), and Girolamo Cardano (1601- 1676 ; De Vita Propria, De Varietate Berum, De Subtilitate ; works, Lyons.
and De Sensibus ; De Sapientia. Cf .
1663). Cf. on this and the following, Rixner und Siber, Leben und Lehrmeinun- gen beriihmter Physiker im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, 7 Hefte, Sulzbacb, 1819 ft). The most brilliant among the Italian natural philosophers is Giordano Bruno
of Nola, in Campania. Born in 1548, and reared in Naples, he met so much sus picion in the Dominican Order, Into which he had entered, that he fled, and from that time on, led an unsettled life. He went by way of Rome and upper Italy to Genoa, Lyons, Toulouse, held lectures in Paris and Oxford, then in Witten berg and Helmstadt, visited also Marburg, Prague, Frankfort, and Zurich, and Anally, in Venice, met the fate of coming into the hands of the Inquisition by treachery. He was delivered to Rome, and there, after imprisonment for sev eral years, was burned, 1600, on account of his steadfast refusal to retract. His Latin works (3 vols. , Naples, 1880-91) concern partly the Lullian art (esp. De Imaginum Signorum et Idearum Compositione), and in part are didactic poems or metaphysical treatises (De Monade Numero et Figura ; De Tripliei Minima) : the Italian writings (ed. by A. Wagner, Leips. 1829, new ed. by P. de Lagarde, 2 vols. , Gottingen, 1888) are partly satirical compositions (II Candelajo,
La Cena delle Cineri, Spaccio della Bestia Trionfante, German by Kuhlenbeck, Leips. 1890, Cabala del Cavallo Pegaseo), and on the other hand, the most complete expositions of his doctrines : Dialoghi della Causa Principio ed Uno, German by Lasson (Berlin, 1872) ; Degli Kroici Furori; DeW Injlnito, Uniterm e Dei Mondi. Cf. Bartholmess, G. B. (Paris, 1816 f. ) ; Dom. Berti, Vita di G. B- (Turin, 1867), and Documenti Intorno a G. B. (Turin, 1880) ; Chr. Sigwart in Kleine Schriflen, I. (Freiburg, 1889) ; H. Brunnhofer, G. B. U Weltanschauung und Verhangniss (Leips. 1882). [G. Bruno, by I. Frith, Lond. , Trflbner: T. Whitaker in Mind, Vol. IX. ].
Another tendency is represented by Bernardino Telesio (1508-1588; De rerum natura jnxta propria principia, Rome, 1666 and Naples, 1686. On him see F. Fiorentino, Florence, 1872 and 1874 ; L. Ferri, Turin, 1873), and his more important successor, Tommaso Campanella. Born 1668, in Stilo of Calabria, he early became a Dominican, was rescued and brought to France after many persecutions and an imprisonment of several years. There he became intimati with the Cartesian circle, and died in Paris. 1639. before the completion of the
Chap. 1. § 28. ]
full edition of bis writings, which was to be called Instauratio Scientiarum. A new edition, with biographical introduction by d'Ancona has appeared (Turin, 1864). Of his very numerous writings may be mentioned: Prodromus Philos- ophite Inttaurandcc, 1617 ; Rtali* Philosophic Parte* Quatuor (with the ap pendix, Civitas Solis), 1623 ; De Monorchia Hispanica, 1626 ; Philotophia Hationalis Parte* Quinque, 1638 ; Universalis Philosophic seu metaphysicarum rerumjuxta propria prineipia partes tres, 1638. Cf. Baldachini, Vitae Filosofla ■ii T. C. (Naples, 1840 and 1843) ; Dom. Berti, Xuovi Documenti di T. C.
(Rome, 1881).
The Warring Tradition*. 357
Theoaophical-inagical doctrines are found with John Reuchlin (1466-1622; De Verbu Mirijlro, De Arte Cabbalistica), Agrippa of Netteahelm (1487-1636 ; De Occulta Philotophia ; De Jncertitudine et Vanitate Scientiarum), Francesco Zormi (1460-1640, De Harmonia Mundi, Paris, 1649).
A more important and independent thinker is Theophrastus Bombastus Par acelsus of Hohenheim (born 1403 at Einsiedeln, he passed an adventurous life, was Professor of Chemistry in Basel, and died in Salzburg, 1641). Among his works (ed. by Huser, Strassburg, 1616-18), the most important are the Opus Paramirum, Die grosse Wundarznei, and De Xatura Rerwm. Cf. R. Eucken, BeitrSge zur Oesch. der neueren Philos. , Heidelberg, 1886. Of his numerous pupils the most important are Johann Baptist van Helmont (1677-1644 ; Ger man ed. of his works, 1683), and his son, Franz Mercurius, also Robert Fludd
(1674-1637, Philosophia Mosaica, Guda, 1638), and others.
The most noteworthy deposit of these movements is formed by the doctrine
of Jacob Boehme. He was born', 1676, near Gorlitz, absorbed all kinds of thoughts in his wanderings, and quietly elaborated them. Settled as a shoe maker at Gorlitz, he came forward, 1610, with his main treatise Aurora, which at a later time after he had been temporarily forced to keep silence, was followed by many others, among them especially Viertig Fragen von der Seele (1620),
Mytterium Magnum (1623), Von der Onadenteahl (1623). He died 1624. Coll. works ed. by Schlebler, Leips. 1862. Cf. 11 A. Fechner, . /. B. , sein Lebeu und stint Schriften, Gorlitz, 1863 ; A. Peip, J. B. der deutsche Philosoph, Leips. 1860.
§ 28. The Struggle between the Traditions.
The immediate attachment to the Greek philosophy which became prevalent in the Renaissance, was not entirely without its precedent in the Middle Ages, and men like Bernard of Chartres and William of Conches (cf. p. 302) were prototypes of the union of an increas ing interest for knowledge of Nature with the humanistic move ment. It is noteworthy, and characteristic of the changing fortune of transmitted doctrines, that now, as then, the union between
Humanism and natural philosophy attaches itself to Plato, and stands in opposition to Aristotle.
1.
In fact, the revival of ancient literature showed itself at first in the form of a strengthening of Platonism. The humanistic move ment had been flowing on since the days of Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio, and arose from the interest in Roman secular literature which was closely connected with the awakening of the Italian national consciousness ; but this current could not become a vic torious stream until it received the help of the impulse from with out which proceeded from the removal of the Byzantine scholars to
Italy. Among these the Aristotelians were of like number and im portance with the Platonists, but the latter brought that which was
358 The Renaissance : Humanistic Period. [Part IV.
relatively less known, and therefore more impressive. In addition to this, Aristotle was regarded in the West as the philosopher who was in agreement with the Church doctrine, and thus the opposition, which longed for something new, hoped much more from Plato ; and still further there was the aesthetic charm that comes from the writ ings of the great Athenian, and for which no time was more keenly susceptible than this. Thus Italy first became intoxicated with an enthusiasm for Plato that matched that of departing antiquity. As if to connect itself immediately with this latter period, the Academy was again to live in Florence, and under the protection of the Medicis a rich scientific activity actually developed here, in which a reverence was paid to the leaders like Gemistus Pletho and Bes- sarion which was not less than that once given to the Scholarchs of Neo-Platonism.
But the relationship with this latter system of thought went deeper; the Byzantine tradition, in which the Platonic doctrine was received, was the Neo-Platonic tradition. What at that time was taught in Florence as Platonism was in truth Neo-Platonism. Mar- silio Ficino translated Plotinus as well as Plato, and his " Platonic Theology " was not much different from that of Proclus. So, too, the fantastic natural philosophy of Patrizzi is in its coneeptional basis nothing but the Neo-Platonic system of emanation ; but it is significant that in this case the dualistic elements of Neo-Plato nism are entirely stripped off, and the monistic tendency brought out more purely and fully. On this account the Neo-Platonist of the Renaissance places in the foreground the beauty of the universe ; on this account even the deity, the Unomnia (One-all) is for him a sublime world-unity which includes plurality harmoniously within itself ; on this account he is able to glorify even the infinity of the universe in a way to fascinate the fancy.
2. The pantheistic tendency, which is so unmistakable in this, was enough to make this Platonism an object of suspicion to the Church, and thus to give its Peripatetic opponents a welcome in strument with which to combat it j and an instrument that was used not only by the scholastic Aristotelians, but also by the others. On the other hand, to be sure, the Platonists could reproach the new humanistic Aristotelianism for its naturalistic tendencies, and praise their own tendency toward the super-sensuous, as allied to Christianity. Thus the two great traditions of Greek philosophy fought their battle over again, while each charged the other with its unchristian character. 1 In this spirit Pletho, in his vo/xatv ovy-
1 Quite the same relation is repeated in the case of the different groups of Aristotelians, each of which wished to be regarded orthodox, — even at the price
Chap. 1, §28. ] Warring Tradition*: Platonistt, Aristotelians. 359
ypa<£tj. conducted his polemic against the Aristotelians, and incurred thereby condemnation from the Patriarch Gennadios in Constanti nople; in this spirit George of Trebizond attacked the Academy, and in the same spirit, though milder, Bessarion answered him. Thus the animosity between the two schools, and the literary stir it produced in antiquity, were transferred to the Renaissance, and it was in vain that men like Leonicus Thomaeus of Padua (died 1533) admonished the combatants to understand the deeper unity that subsists between the two heroes of philosophy.
3. Meanwhile there was absolutely no unity among the Aristote lians themselves. The Grecian interpreters of the Stagirite and their adherents looked down with as much contempt upon the Averroists as upon the Thomists. Both passed for them in like manner as barbarians ; they themselves, however, were for the most part prepossessed in favour of that interpretation of the Master which was closely allied to Stratonism, and which was best repre sented among the commentators by Alexander of Aphrodisias. Here, too, one transmitted theory stood in opposition to the others. The conflict was especially severe in Padua, where the Averroists saw their fortress threatened by the successful activity of Pomponatius as a teacher. The main point of controversy was the problem of immortality. Neither party admitted a full, individual immor
tality, but Averroism believed that it possessed at least a compensa tion for this in the unity of the intellect, while the Alexandrists attached even the rational part of the soul to its animal conditions, and regarded it as perishable with them. Connected with this were the discussions on theodicy, providence, destiny and freedom of the will, miracles and signs, in which Pomponazzi frequently inclined strongly to the Stoic doctrine.
In the course of time this dependence upon commentators and their oppositions was also stripped off, and the way prepared for a pure, immediate apprehension of Aristotle. This succeeded best with Ceesalpinus, who avowed his complete allegiance to Aristotle. An equally correct understanding of the Peripatetic system was gained by the German Humanists from a philological standpoint, but following Melancthon's precedent they adopted this in their own doctrine only in so far as it agreed with Protestant dogma.
4. In all these cases the adoption of Greek philosophy led to an opposition to Scholasticism as regards the real content or matter of
of the •' twofold truth. " In this the Averroists, especially, were ready, and io it came about that one of tlieni, N'ifo, had himself entrusted by the Pope with the refutation of Komponazzi's doctrine of immortality. The latter, indeed, also covered himself with the same shield.
360 The Renaissance : Humanistic Period. [Part IV.
the opposing systems. Another line of Humanism, which was more in sympathy with Roman literature, inclined to a predominantly formal opposition, of which John of Salisbury may be regarded as
a mediaeval forerunner. The taste of the Humanists rebelled against the barbarous outward form of mediaeval literature. Accustomed to the polished refinement and transparent clearness of the ancient writers, they were not able to value rightly the kernel so full of character, which lay within the rough shell of the scholastic termi nology. The minds of the Renaissance, with their essentially aes thetic disposition, had no longer any feeling for the abstract nature of that science of abstract conceptions. Thus they opened the battle in all directions, with the weapons of jest and of earnest ; instead oj conceptions they demanded things ; instead of artificially constructed words, the language of the cultivated world ; instead of subtle proofs and distinctions, a tasteful exposition that should speak to the imagination and heart of the living man.
Laurentius Valla was the first to make this cry resound. Agric- ola took it up in lively controversy, and Erasmus also joined in. The models of these men were Cicero and Quintilian, and when at their hand the method of philosophy was to be changed, the scho lastic dialectic was dislodged and in its place were introduced the principles of rhetoric and grammar. The true dialectic is the science of discourse. 1 The " Aristotelian " logic therefore becomes the object of most violent polemic ; the doctrine of the syllogism is to be simplified and driven from its commanding situation. The syllogism is incapable of yielding anything new ; it is an unfruitful form of thought. This was later emphasised by Bruno, Bacon, and Descartes, as strongly as by these Humanists.
But the more closely the dominance of the syllogism was con nected with dialectical " Realism," the more nominalistic and teruii- nistic motives connected themselves with the humanistic opposition. This shows itself in the cases of Vives and Nizolius. They are zealous against the reign of universal conceptions; in this, according to Vives, lies the true reason for the mediaeval corruption of the sciences. "Universals, Nizolius teaches,' are collective names which arise by comprehension," not by abstraction ; individual things with their qualities constitute reality. It concerns us to apprehend these, and the secondary activity of the understanding which com pares, is to be carried out as simply and unartificially as possible. Hence all metaphysical assumptions, which have made so great a
1 Petr. Ramus, Dialect. Instil. , at the beginning. * Mar. Nizolius, De Ver. Princ, I. 4-7 ; III. 7.
Chap. 1, § aJ8. ] Warring Traditions : Humanists, Ramus. 361
difficulty in previous dialectic, must be banished from logic. Em piricism can use only a. purely formal logic.
The "natural " dialectic, however, was sought in rhetoric and grammar, for, Ramus held, it should teach us only to follow in our voluntary thinking the same laws which, according to the nature of reason, control also our involuntary thinking, and present themselves
in the correct expression of this involuntary process of thought. In all reflection, however, the essential thing is to discover the point of view that is determinative for the question, and then to apply this correctly to the subject. Accordingly Ramus, following a remark of Vives,1 divides his new dialectic into the doc trines of Inventio and Judicium. The first part is a kind of general logic, which yet cannot avoid introducing again in the form of the
which is accordingly much smaller than formerly. In the second place the judgment is to unite cognitions that belong together to a systematic whole, by definition and division ; its highest task, how ever, it fulfils only when it brings all knowledge into relation to God, and finds it grounded in him. Thus natural dialectic culminates in theosophy. *
Slight as was the depth and real originality of this rhetorical system, it yet excited great respect in a time that was eager for the new. In Germany, especially, Ramists and anti-Ramists engaged in vehement controversy. Among the friends of the system, Jo hannes Sturm is especially worthy of note, a typical pedagogue of
Humanism, who set the task for education of bringing the scholar to the point where he knows things, and how to judge concerning them from a correct point of view, and to sj>eak in cultivated manner.
5. A characteristic feature of this movement is its cool relation toward metaphysics ; this very fact proves its derivation from the Roman popular philosophy. Cicero, to whom it especially attached
itself, was particularly influential by virtue of his Academic Scepti cism or Probabilism. Surfeit of abstract discussions alienated a considerable part of the Humanists from the great systems of
' Lad. Vires, Dt Cautis Corr. Art. (first put of Dt Ditciplinis), III. 6, •CI. E. Laaa, Die PUdagogik de$ J. St. kritisch und hittoritch beleuchttt
spontaneously
•• loci " the categories, such as Causality, Inherence, Genus, etc. , and thus, enumerating them without system, falls into the naive meta physics of the ordinary idea of the world. The doctrine of judgment is developed by Ramus in three stages. The first is the simple de cision of the question by subsuming the object under the discovered point of view ; here the doctrine of the syllogism has its place,
(Badio, 1872).
362 Tlie Renaissance : Humanistic Period. [Pabt IV.
antiquity also. The extension of religious unbelief or indifferent- ism was an additional motive to make scepticism appear in many circles as the right temper for the cultivated man. The charm of outer life, the glitter of refined civilisation, did the rest to bring about indifference toward philosophical subtleties.
This scepticism of the man of the world was brought to its complete expression by Montaigne. With the easy grace and fine ness of expression of a great writer, he thus gave French literature a fundamental tone which has remained its essential character. But this movement also runs in the ancient track. Whatever of philosophical thought is found in the "Essays" arises from Pyr rhonism. Hereby a thread of tradition which had for a long time been let fall is again taken up. The relativity of theoretical opin ions and ethical theories, the illusions of the senses, the cleft between subject and object, the constant change in which both are involved, the dependence of all the work of the intellect upon such doubtful data, — all these arguments of ancient Scepticism meet us
here, not in systematic form, but incidentally in connection with the discussion of individual questions, and thus in a much more impressive manner.
Pyrrhonism was at the same time revived in a much more scho lastic form by Sanchez, and yet in a lively manner, and not without hope that a sure insight might yet at some time be allowed to man. He concludes individual chapters, and -the whole work, with "Nescisf At ego nescio. Quid? " To this great "Quid? "he has indeed given no answer, and guidance to a true knowledge was a debt that he did not discharge. But he left no doubt as to the direction in which he sought it. It was the same which Montaigne also pointed out : science must free itself from the word-lumber of the wisdom of the schools, and put its questions directly to things themselves. Thus Sanchez demands a new knowledge, and has, indeed, a dim foreboding of but where and how to be sought he not prepared to say. In many passages seems as though he would proceed to empirical investigation of Nature, but just here he cannot get beyond the sceptical doctrine of outer perception, and he recognises the greater certainty of inner experience, this inner experience in turn loses its value because of its indefiniteness.
Charron comes forward with firmer step, since he keeps before him the practical end of wisdom. Like his two predecessors he doubts the possibility of certain theoretical knowledge; in this respect all three set up the authority of the Church and of faith
metaphysics can be revealed only the human power of knowl edge not sufficient for it. But, proceeds Charron, the human
a is
is
;
:
if
it
it,
it is
Chap. 1, § 28. ] Warring Tradition* : Sanchez, Catholicism. 363
knowing faculty is all the more sufficient for that self-knowledge which is requisite for the moral life. To this self-knowledge belongs, above all, the humility of the sceptic who has no confidence that he knows anything truly, and in this humility is rooted the freedom of spirit with which he everywhere withholds his theoretical judgment. On the other hand, the ethical command of righteous ness and of the fulfilment of duty is known without a doubt in this self-knowledge.
This diversion toward the practical realm, as might be expected from the general tendency of the time, was not permanent. The later Sceptics turned the theoretical side of the Pyrrhonic tradi tion again to the front, and the effect which resulted from this tendency for the general tone of the time applied ultimately, for the most part, to the certainty of dogmatic convictions.
6. The Church doctrine could no longer master these masses of thought which now made their way so powerfully into the life of this period, as it had succeeded in doing with the Arabian-Aristote lian invasion : this new world of ideas was too manifold and too full of antitheses, and, on the other hand, the assimilative power of the Church dogma was too far exhausted. The Roman Church limited itself, therefore, to defending its spiritual and external power with all the means at its disposal, and was only concerned to fortify its own tradition and make it as sure as possible within itself. In this changed form the Jesuits now performed the same task that in the thirteenth century had fallen to the mendicant orders. With their help the definitive and complete form of Church dogma was fixed against all innovations at the Council of Trent (1563), and Thomism declared to be authoritative in essentials for philosophical doctrine. Thereafter there could be no more any question as to changes of principle, but only as to more skilful presentations and occasional insertions. In this way the Church excluded itself from the fresh
movement of the time, and the philosophy dependent upon it fell into unavoidable stagnation for the next following centuries. Even the short after-bloom which Scholasticism experienced about 1600 in the universities of the Iberian ]>cninsula bore no real fruit Suarez was an important writer, clear, acute, accurate, and with a gTeat capacity for a luminous disposition of his thoughts ; he sur passes also, to a considerable degree, hiost of the older Scholastics in the form of his expression ; but in the content of his doctrine he is bound by tradition, and a like constraint will be understood as a matter of course in the case of the collective work of the Jesuits of Coimbra.
Over against this form of religious tradition, another now made
364 The Renaissance : Humanittic Period. [Part IV.
its appearance in the Protestant churches. Here, too, the opposition claimed the older tradition, and put aside its mediaeval modifications and developments. The Reformation desired to renew original Chris tianity as against Catholicism. It drew the circle of the canonical books narrower again ; putting aside the Vulgate, it recognised only the Greek text as authoritative ; it returned to the Nicene creed. The controversy over dogmas in the sixteenth century — theoretically considered — hinges upon the question, which tradition of Chris tianity shall be the binding one.
But the theological antithesis drew the philosophical antithesis after and here again relation was repeated which had appeared at many points during the Middle Ages. In the doctrine of Angus tine, the religious need found a deeper, richer satisfaction, and more immediate expression than in the conceptions worked out by the Scholastics. Earnestness in the consciousness of sin, passionate longing for redemption, faith that was internal in its source and its nature, — all these were traits of Augustine's nature which repeated themselves in Luther and Calcin. But only in the doctrine of Calvin that the permanent influence of the great Church Father shown and yet just by this means an antagonism between
Tkomi8tn and Augustinianism was once more created, which evinced itself as especially important in the French literature of the seven teenth century (cf. 30 f. ). For the Catholics under the guidance of Jesuitism, Thomas was the ruling authority for the Reformed Churches, and for the freer tendencies in Catholicism itself, Augus tine held the same position.
German Protestantism followed other courses. In the develop ment of the Lutheran dogma, Luther's genius was aided by the co operation of Melancthon and thus of Humanism. Little as the theoretico-aesthetical and religiously indifferent nature of the Humanists1 might accord with the mighty power of Luther's soul with its profound faith, he was, nevertheless, obliged, when he would give his work scientific form, to accommodate himself to the neces sity of borrowing from philosophy the conceptions with which to lay his foundations. Here, however, Melancthon's harmonising nature came in, and while Luther had passionately rejected scholastic Aristotelianism, his learned associate introduced
totelianism as the philosophy of Protestantism, here, too, opposing the older tradition to the remodelled tradition. This Aristotelianism had to be corrected in many passages, to be sure, by
On the relation of the Reformation and Humanism cf. Th. Ziegler, Gesrh der-Ethik, II. 414 ff.
humanistic Aris- original
1
;
; §
is
it,
it is
a
a
Chap. 1, § 28. ] Warring Tradition* : Protestantism. 365
means of the Scriptures, and the combination of doctrines could not reach such an organic union as had been attained by the slow ripen ing of Thoinism in the Middle Ages ; but the Peripatetic system was in this instance treated rather as but a supplement to theology in the department of profane science, and for this end, Melancthon knew how to sift, arrange, and set forth the material in his text-books with so great skill that it became the basis for a doctrine which was in the main one in its nature, and as such was taught at the Protestant universities for two centuries.
7. But in Protestantism there were still other traditional forces active. Luther's work of liberation owed its origin and its success not least to Mysticism, — not indeed to that sublime, spiritualised form of viewing the world to which the genius of Master Eckhart had given expression, but to the movement of deepest piety which, as " practical Mysticism," had spread from the Rhine in the " League of the Friends of God," and in the " Brothers of the Common Life. "
For this Mysticism, the disposition, purity of heart, and the imita tion of Christ were the sole content of religion; assent to dog mas, the external works of holiness, the whole worldly organisation of Church life, appeared to be matters of indifference and even hindrances : the believing soul demands only the freedom of its own religious life, — a demand that transcends all these outward works. This was the inner source of the Reformation. Luther himself had not only searched Augustine, he had also edited the " German The ology " : and his word let loose the storm of this religious longing, with which, in the conflict against Rome, an impulse of national independence was also mingled.
But when the Protestant State Church became again consolidated in the fixed forms of a theoretical system of doctrine, and clung to this the more anxiously in proportion as it was obliged to struggle for its existence in the strife of Confessions, then the supra-confes- sional impulse of Mysticism became undeceived, as did also the national consciousness. The theological fixation of the thought of the Reformation appeared as its ruin, and as Luther had once waged his warfare against the " sophistry " of the Scholastics, so now a movement of Mysticism that was quietly stirring farther and wider among the people, directed itself against his own creation. In men like Osiander and Schwenckfeld he had to contend against parts of his own nature and its development. But in this movement it became evident that the doctrines of mediaeval Mysticism had been quietly maintained and continued in legendary form amid all kinds of fantastic ideas and obscure imagery. The Mysticism which conies to light in the teachings of men like Sebastian Franck, or in the
366 The Renaissance : Humanistic Period. [1'akt VI
secretly circulated tracts of Valentine Weigel, has its support in the idealism of Eckhart, which transformed all the outer into the inner, all the historical into the eternal, and saw in the process of Nature and history but the symbol of the spiritual and divine. This con stituted, though frequently in strange form, the deeper ground of the battle which the Mystics of the sixteenth century waged in Germany against the " letter " of theology.
8. Look where we will in the intellectual movement of the fif teenth and sixteenth centuries, we see everywhere tradition arrayed against tradition, and every controversy is a battle between trans mitted doctrines. The spirit of the Western peoples has now taken up into itself the entire material which the past offers for its cul ture, and in the feverish excitement into which it is finally put by direct contact with the highest achievements of ancient science, it struggles upward to the attainment of complete independence. It feels sufficiently hardened to execute work of its own, and overflow ing with its wealth of thought, it seeks new tasks. One feels the impulsive blood of youth pulsate in its literature, as though some thing unheard of, something which had never before been, must now come into being. The men of the Renaissance announce to us nothing less than the approach of a total renovation of science and of the state of humanity. The warfare between the transmitted doctrines leads to a surfeit of the past; learned research into the old wisdom ends with throwing aside all book-rubbish, and full of the youthful joy of dawning, growing life, the mind goes forth into the cosmic life of Nature ever young.
The classical portrayal of this temper of the Renaissance is the first monologue in Goethe's Faust.
§ 29. Hacrocosm and Microcosm.
By Scotism and Terminism the faith -metaphysics of the Middle Ages had become disintegrated and split in twain : everything supersensuous had been given to dogma, and as the object of philos ophy there remained the world of experience. But before thought had as yet had time to become clear as to the methods and special problems of this secular knowledge, Humanism, and with it above all, the Platonic Weltanschauung, burst in. No wonder that the solu tion of the problem, which was itself at first seen but dimly, was first sought in connection with this theory : and this doctrine must have been the more welcome, especially in its Neo-Platonic form, as it showed the world of the supersensuous presageful in the back ground, but made the particulars of the world of sense stand out
Chap. 1, § 20. ] Macrocosm and Microcosm: Bruno, Boehme. 367
distinctly in purposefully defined outlines. The supersensuous itself, and all therein that was connected with man's religious life, might be cheerfully set off to theology ; philosophy could dedicate itself to the task of being natural science, with all the calmer con science in proportion as it followed the Neo-Platonic precedent of
Nature as a product of spirit, and thus believed that in the conception of the deity it retained a point of unity for the diverging branches of science, the spiritual and the secular. Did theology teach how God reveals himself in the Scripture, it was now the business of philosophy to apprehend with admiration his revela tion in Nature. On this account the beginnings of modern natural science were theosophical and thoroughly Neo-Platonic.
1. The characteristic fact, however, is that in this revival of Neo-Platonisra, the last dualistic motives which had belonged to the same were also completely set aside. They disappeared together with the specifically religious interest which had supported them, and the theoretical element of recognising in Nature the creative divine power came forward pure and unmixed. 1 The fundamental tendency in the natural philosophy of the Renaissance was therefore the fanciful or imaginative conception of the divine unity of the liv ing All. the admiration of the macrocosm : the fundamental thought of Plotinus of the beauty of the universe has been taken up by no other time so sympathetically as by this ; and this beauty was now also regarded as a manifestation of the divine Idea. Such a view is expressed in almost entirely Neo-Platonic forms by Patrizzi, in a more original form and with strongly ]>oetical quality by Giordano Bruno, and likewise by Jacob Boehme. With Bruno the symbol of the all-forming and all-animating primitive light is still dominant (cf.