opinions so long consecrated by time, and the adoption of a creed more pure in its principles, and more liberal in its spirit, could not fail to encourage, on all other subjects, a congenial freedom of inquiry. These circumstances operated still more directly and powerfully, by their influence in undermining the authority of Aristotle; an authority which for many years was scarcely inferior in the schools to that of the Scriptures, and which, in some Universities, was supported by statutes, requiring the teachers to promise upon oath, that, in their public lectures, they would follow no other guide.
Luther,[1] who was perfectly aware of the corruptions which the Romish Church had contrived to connect with their veneration for the Stagirite,[2] not only threw off the yoke himself, but, in various parts of his writings, speaks of Aristotle with most unbecoming asperity and contempt.[3] In one very remarkable passage, he asserts, that the study of Aristotle was wholly useless, not only in Theology, but in Natural Philosophy. "What does it contribute," he asks, "to the knowledge of things, to trifle and cavil in language conceived and prescribed by Aristotle, concerning matter, form, motion, and time?"[4] The same
- ↑ Born 1483, died 1546.
- ↑ In one of his letters he writes thus: "Ego simpliciter credo, quod impossibile sit ecclesiam reformari, nisi funditus canones, decretales, scholastica theologia, philosphia, logica, et nune habentur, eradicentur, et alia instituantur."—Brackeri Hist. Crit. Phil. tom. iv. p. 95.
- ↑ For a specimen of Luther's scurrility against Aristotle, see Bayle, Art. Luther, Note HH.
In Luther's Colloquia Mensalia we are told, that "he abhorred the school-men, and called them sophistical locusts, caterpillars, frogs, and lice." From the same work we learn, that "he hated Aristotle, but highly esteemed Cicero, as a wise and good man."—See Jortin's Life of Erasmus, p. 121. - ↑ "Nihil adjumenti ex ipso haberi posse non solum ad theologiam sen sacras literas, verum etiam and ipsam naturalem philosophiam. Quid enim juvet ad rerum cognitionem, si de materia, forma, motu, tempore, nugari et cavillari queas verbis ab Aristotle conceptis at præscriptis?"—Bruck. Hist. Phil. tom. iv. p. 101.
The following passage to the same purpose is quoted by Bayle: "Non mihi persuadebitis, philosophiam esse garrulitatem illam de materia, motu, infinito, loco, vacuo, tempore, quæ ferè in Aristototele sola discimus, talis quæ nec intellectum, nec affectum, nec communes homoinum mores quidquam juvent; tantum contentionibus serendis, seminandisque idonea."—Bayle. Art. Luther, Note HH.
I borrow from Bale another short extract from Luther: "Nihil ita ardet animus quàm histrionem illum, (Aristotelem,) qui tam verè Græca larva ecclesiam lusit, multis revlare ignominiamque ejus cunctis ostendere, si otium esset. Habeo in manus comment-ariolos in 1. Physicorum, quibus fabulam Aristæi denuò agere statui in meum istum Protea (Aristotelem). Pars crucis meæ vel maxima est, quod videre cogor fractrum optima ingenia, bonis studiis nata, in istis cœnis vitam agere, et operam perdere."—Ibid.
That Luther was deeply skilled in the scholastic philosophy we learn from very high authority, that of Melanchthon; who tells us farther, that he was strenous partisan of the sect of Nominalists, or, as they were then generally called, Terminists.—Bruck. tom. iv. pp. 93, 94, et seq.
