INFORMATION TO USERS This m anuscrit has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text diiectfy from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, whfle others may be from a i^9 pe of conqniter printer. The quality of this reproduction Is dependent upon the quali^ of the copy snhroittod. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality filustrations and photognqths, print Ueedtfaroo^ substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikefy, event that the author did not send UMI a complete manusciipt and there are missing pages, these wili be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyti^ material had to be removed, a note will mdicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g^ maps, drawings, diarts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, begirming at the upper left-hand corner and continning from left to r ^ r t in equal sections with small overhqn. Bad* original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the bade of the bode. Photographs induded in the or^jnal manuscript have been reproduced xerogr^hically in this copy. Ifigber quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Beil & Howellinformation Company 300 Norm ZeebRoad. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800.521-0600 PHILIP MELANCHTHON'S REFORM OF GERMAN UNIVERSITIES AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE: A STUDY ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RENAISSANCE HUMANISM AND THE REFORMATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Joon-Chul Park, B.A., M.A. The Ohio State University 1995 Dissertation Committee: Approved by James M. Kittelson John C. Rule _______ Adviser Joseph H. Lynch / lepartment of History DNI Number: 9544661 OKI Microform 9544661 copyright 1995, by OMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Copyright by Joon-Chul Park 1995 To My Father 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation is the harvest of my study for nine years as a graduate student. I have been greatly indebted to many professors of the Department of History of the Ohio State University. Through the individual study with Dr. Nathan Rosenstein, I learned much about the history of Imperial Rome and early Christiemity. Dr. Joseph Lynch not only taught me the life of medieval monks, friars, and heretics, but also provided scrupulous and precious criticisms for my dissertation. I could broaden my insight into early modem European history from the attractive classes of Dr. John Rule, who also read the draft and offered valueüsle suggestions. When I turn to my mentor Dr. Jeunes Kittelson, I eun at a loss how to express the sense of gratitude. Without his patience, encouragement, and guideuice with profound knowledge on the educational operation of the Reformation, this work would have never been possible. I am also sincerely grateful to my wife, Hynu-Mi. She offered consistent inspiration, endured the ever-coming nostalgia, auid solely took care of our two children. Finally, I appreciate the sacrifice, love, and prayer of my aged parents for a son studying in a foreign country for a long time. Theuik all of you. iii VITA November 18, 1960 .............. B o m - Seoul, Korea 1986 ........................... B.A., Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea 1989 ........................... M.A., Indiana University, Bloomington, Indieuia 1991-1994 ...................... Teaching Associate, Department of History, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELD OF STUDY Major Field: History Studies in Early Modem Europe ... Dr. James Kittelson Dr. John Rule Studies in Medieval Europe ...... Dr. Joseph Lynch Studies in Ancient Europe ..... Dr. Nathan Rosenstein IV table of contents DEDICATION ........................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................... iii VITA ................................................. iv ABBREVIATIONS ........................................ vi CHAPTER PAGE I. PERSPECTIVES AND HISTORIOGRAPHY............... 1 II. CLERGY AND UNIVERSITY STUDY IN LATE MEDIEVAL GERMANY ........................ 32 III. MELANCHTHON ON CLERICAL EDUCATION ............ 80 IV. REFORM OF WITTENBERG AND LEIPZIG ............. 118 V. REFORM OF TÜBINGEN AND HEIDELBERG ............ 157 VI. LUTHERAN CLERGY IN THE LATE REFORMATION...... 191 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................ 213 ABBREVIATIONS CR Corpus Reformatorum. Philippi Melanchthonis Opera. ed. by Carlos G. Bretschneider and Henricus E. Bindseil, 28 vols. (Halle, 1834- 1860) . LW Luther's Works. 55 vols. (St. Louis, Concordia Publishing House, 1955) . MWA Melanchthons Werlce in Auswahl. ed. by Robert Stupperich, 6 vols. (Gütersloh, 1951-1961) . SBUL Die Statutenbûcher der Universitât Leipzig aus den ersten 150 Jahren ihres Bestehens. ed. by Friedrich Zamcke (Leipzig, 1861) . SRUH Statuten und Reformation der Universitât Heidelberg vom 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert. ed. by August Thorbecke (Leipzig, 1891). UBUH Urkundenbuch der Universitat Heidelberg, ed. by Eduard Winkelmann, 2 vols. (Heidelberg, 1886). UBOW Urkundenbuch der Universitât Wittenberg, ed. by Walter Friedensburg, 2 vols. (Magdeburg, 1926) . UGUT Urkunden zur Geschichte der Universitat Tübingen aus den Jahren 1476-1550. ed. by Rudolph von Roth (Tübingen, 1877) . WA D. Martin Luthers Werke. 65 vols. (Weimar, 1883-1993). WA Br D. Martin Luthers Werke. Briefwechsel. 15 vois. (Weimar, 1930-1978). WA Tr D. Martin Luthers Werke. Tischreden. 6 vols. (Weimar, 1912-1921). VI CHAPTER I PERSPECTIVES AND HISTORIOGRAPHY The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between Renaissance humanism and the Reformation. Ever since the early twentieth century the subject has drawn considercüsle attention from Reformation scholars. Replete with various perspectives and growing interest, it has occupied a central position in Reformation studies. In spite of massive scholarly enthusiasm emd eleüooration, however, the nature of the association between the two colossal movements has remained elusive and indeterminable; historiems have passed different judgments on it.*^ As James Tracy stated in his research-guiding work, the subject under inquiry has been a 'conundrum' to its students.^ It should be noted that nothing is more illustrative of the nature of the 'conundrum' them the different attitudes of two contemporary luminaries of the sixteenth century, Luther and Erasmus, representing the Reformation emd humemism respectively. From the outset the Wittenberg Reformer cherished humemism, albeit not for its own sake, emd looked upon it as an indispensaOale ally to the movement he launched. It has been well-known that Luther was proficient in Biblical 2 humanism fostered by such notables as Erasmus and Reuchlin, which helped to pave the way to his 'Reformation breakthrough.'' As Philip Schwartzerd changed his name to Melanchthon, Luther accepted a classical name, Eleutherius ("Free Man"), and regarded himself as a second Reuchlin. He played a crucial role in the humanistic curricular reform of the University of Wittenberg in 1518.‘ In his Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation (1520), Luther lamented conditions he found in the contemporary schools and advocated Bible- emd humamism-oriented curricular reform at all Germany universities.® And throughout his career, Luther vigorously and consistently endorsed the necessity of the studia humanitatis for his educational reform, without which he thought the implementation of his new message would be impossible.® On the other hand, Erasmus, the "Prince of Humauiism, " realized, soon after his initial support for the reform camp, that the nature of what Luther was attempting to achieve was quite alien to his religious assumptions. He and his adherents recognized that Luther challenged the Catholic Church not as a humanist; neither his disparagement of the bcurbarous style of scholasticism nor his attack on the immorality of the Romem Church was his ultimate goal, and his slogan of sola Scriptura was not purely to exalt the humanistic ideal of ad fontes. Luther's aspiration was far beyond their aim of ameliorating the church and enlightening 3 society within the established order,* he was rejecting the fundamental Catholic dogma of what he called at Heidelberg, "the theology of glory," together with its concomitant institutions and practices. On the other hand, Erasmus's innermost conviction was ultimately Catholic. As the reform movement progressed in a radical pattern, Erasmus forsook his typical peace-loving attitude and outspokenly considered Luther an enemy of the bonae literae. The turmoil of the 1520s, whose violence and obscurantism severely damaged many schools and universities, finally forced Erasmus to declare the feunous words : "Where Lutheranism reigns, knowledge perishes."^ The discrepancy between Luther's predilection for humanism, albeit from religious motives, and Erasmus's repudiation of the religious extremism denying the traditional system all by themselves render any univocal evaluation of the nature of the relationship between humanism and the Reformation hardly tenable. Modem scholars' interpretations of the subject have scarcely unraveled the thread and indeed, in some respects, have entangled