Tension between Pagan and Christian Notions of Political Virtue in Desiderius Erasmuss Education - Essay Example

The Tension between Pagan and Christian Notions of Political Virtue in Desiderius Erasmus’s Education of a Christian Prince Introduction Erasmus wrote his book in a period of political instability resulting from regular undertakings of different European supremacies to enlarge their territories. The aim the scripting of this book was to show how to raise appropriately a state leader who will be a ‘real Christian prince’. In this attempt, Erasmus tries to make a comparison between a tyrant and a ruler. This is done to ensure that the prince can make a decision on the roles to adopt and those to detest. Erasmus compares a prince with a father whose greatest concern is his children. On the contrary, he resembles a tyrant with a harsh master who is self-cantered. Erasmus refers to a tyrant as the ‘Prince of Darkness’ who is despised by all in the community. He adds that the only support a tyrant has is from the wicked men. A Prince must show good characteristics so that his subjects can respect him willingly and gain appreciation as a king. To win the love of the community members, a Christian prince’s devotion must be towards delivering adequate service to his people. Erasmus advises that a virtuous prince must be a philosopher, as this would make it hard for him to change into a tyrant. Qualities of a Christian Prince Erasmus touches on hereditary succession in his educational treatise, ‘Institutio principis christiani’ addressed to the future emperor Charles V, in 1515. In the treatise he declared that hereditary succession is a risky way of choosing a ruler. Erasmus points out that appointment of a prince by the leaders of the community would be more rational. The appointment would ensure that the community gets a proficient leader. When a state decides to choose a prince through elections, looking at the candidate’s family background would be inappropriate. The electorates may prefer a candidate who is a strong, quiet and with an easy-going spirit. Additionally, it is authoritative to contemplate on the age and state of health of the prince. This would serve to eliminate dangers of sudden death that may result to leadership constraints in the state. A prince should have excellent navigation skills and should be alert and dependable. Above all, he must show qualities of being just, wise, able to foresee, moderate and enthusiastic in matters of public concern. Erasmus on Education of a Christian Prince Primarily, Erasmus emphasizes persistently on the importance of early childhood development education. Early education is essential because of the vitality of learning to human life, for what it entails to be human. Erasmus repeatedly emphasizes that a person who lacks education or has no desire for wisdom ‘is less human’ or ‘lacks humanity altogether’ (Erasmus, 1974, p.39). This belief on matters of education drives Erasmus to promote public responsibility of providing universal education to citizens. He asserts that ‘children of commoners are human beings just like those of royal family’. Secondly, he argues that methods of education that amuse and delight students are more effective than those that emphasize coercion and fear. Thirdly, he insists that the moral dimension of education that cultivates the student’s development of virtue and good character is the tutor’s task (Parrish, 2010, p.592). The key hope for the prince to be a good leader is his effective education. Erasmus affirms that a competent teacher is crucial in the upbringing of a real prince. The tutor should be able to formulate a model of a good prince and that of a tyrant. This would enable the young soul of a prince to despise the character portrayed by a tyrant. The tutor should make the student understand that a tyrant is a menace subject to elimination that should be done by armed forces. Unlike a tyrant, the society respects and looks upon a real prince. He has a godlike manifestation, and his primary aim is ensuring peace in his territory. A real prince is ready to risk his life for the welfare of the society. The people he rules over are also supposed to be ready to lay down their lives to ensure the safety of the prince. The prince rewards virtuous men and instead of punishing the wicked, he opts to forgive them if they promise to mend their crooked ways. A real prince governs with wisdom, goodwill and integrity whereas a tyrant uses deceit and threats to rule people. This kind of leadership keeps a tyrant anxious about his safety and the possibility internal rebellions by his people. The reason for this is the fact that he oppresses his people thus the likelihood of them rebelling against him is high. In addition, the tyrant enjoys waging wars and arousing internal conflicts and causing party disputes in order to weaken his subjects. He does this to ensure that the subjects do not get the necessary strength and unity that they would use against him. Instead of war, Erasmus recurrently endorses arbitration that would become the central plank of the global peace movement when it arose in the 19th century. This would also become a regular practice of the state. This culminated in the development of the permanent court of arbitration as an outcome of the first Hague peace conference in 1899 (Van den Dungen, 2009, p.414). A prince strives in promoting peace and harmony and is well aware that war causes misfortunes and thus aims at strengthening his people. Besides the greatest wealth of a prince lies in the love and honor he receives from the society. A tyrant does not value members of the state who can offer advice, judgment or moral quality due to fear that they might overthrow him from power. On the other hand, the prince regards them as true advisors and does not concentrate on the flatterers (Erasmus and Rummel, 1990, p. 252). He is aware that a genuine friend will be a good critic, and false friends will only be a flirt. A real prince should feel a sense of belonging to his followers. If one does not have the capability of developing this feeling, Erasmus feels that such an individual is not eligible for prince hood. Being a genuine Christian Prince is a tough task but again being a tyrant is much tougher since it is hard to maintain deception and simulation. The realm of a prince is long lasting while that of a tyrant is of a short term, and the future generations will always despise the tyrant. Erasmus proceeds and draws analogies amongst animals, princes and tyrants. He compares a tyrant with predatory animals that survive by killing and plundering. Erasmus points out that a tyrant is more of a savage than the animals since animals do not kill their own. A tyrant would easily kill his own subjects. Erasmus, on the other hand, compares a prince with a ‘King Bee’ that always stays in a central point, but constantly aims at ensuring the welfare of his fellow humans. Unlike other bees, the king bee does not sting since society does not want a prince who is revengeful in his acts. Erasmus advises further on the virtues that should be present in a Christian Prince also talks of pagans. For pagans, kingship is equivalent to tyranny but this is not the case for Christians. A pagan prince rules barbarically. On the contrary, Christian virtues require a Christian prince to rule with benevolence, bearing in mind that Christ himself was considered a Prince (Rummel, 2004, p.56). Erasmus compares the duty of a prince in a state to that of a human heart that gives life to the entire body and it being a vital part of that body. Erasmus work initially refers to a monarchy as the best form of governance. However, he adds that a monarchical government should go hand in hand with aristocracy and democracy. This prevents the monarchical government from turning into tyranny. The views held by Erasmus are similar to those of Aristotle (in politics) and those of Solomon, Nero and Samuel. It is evident that a tyrant represents the greatest curse to humanity. On the other hand, society views a genuine prince as a blessing from God. The discussion of monarchical governments makes Erasmus’ political thought seem conventional for the 16th century. He shows that he was unconventional in the respect that he was a pacifist and regarded war as the assailing vice of monarchical governance. This is because the ambitious courtiers work for their own good. They promote policies that enable the ruler to gain glory, more power, expand his territory and acquire more wealth. Erasmus’ hope was that effective indoctrination of future leaders in Christian morals and principles would protect them from stupid and destructive policies. He expects that this would convince the leaders to encourage justice and promote the joy and prosperity of the people over who the prince rules. Erasmus proceeds and warns any prince that wars lead to recurrent wars and the ruler contemplating war must calculate the cost of war to a state. In addition, the cost, the ruler must put into consideration the anxieties, dangers and uncertainties that occur in the course of war (Pascal, 2012, p. 1). The occurrence of war brings up the need to hire and pamper mercenary soldiers. Erasmus despised this group of people and referred them to as “barbarian rabble, made up of all the worst scoundrels”. Erasmus warns against harmful impacts on national stereotypes by which other nations are slandered. However, in real life national labels that divide Christians are less important compared to the name of Christ that unite all who believe in his name. He laments that, though wise priests are expected to refrain from hatred and war, during his time bishops and priests triggered hostility. The Instituito ends with warning against follies, dangers, and the nature of war that is not in line with Christianity. The concluding point is about a political leader who arranged the appointment of Erasmus as a councilor and was a leader of the national faction in court politics. Erasmus’ treatise, De Civilitate Morum Puerilium 1530, asserted that the mission of moulding a future prince consists of several parts. The fist and the most fundamental part are about the implantation of seeds of piety in the gentle heart. The second part involves instilling a love for and providing adequate knowledge of the liberal arts. The third part involves giving instructions to the duties of life and the fourth part involves the inculcation of good habits right from the earliest years of life. The knowledge a prince acquires in the first years of his life is of dire importance. In addition to establishing a decent moral character, education inculcates skills necessary for maintaining freedom of the human mind. This protects people from undesirable influence from external factors or individuals. Education is an asset that distinguishes humans from other creatures. Erasmus pointed out that ‘while other animals operate out of instincts, humans operate from reasoning they nurture by learning’ (Faber, 2005, p.28). Erasmus further writes, “Every human being can be trained in virtues without any difficulty. Nature has implanted lively seeds in us to achieve this objective and what is needed besides this natural predisposition is the effort of a devoted tutor.” Erasmus and politics Erasmus lacked the concept of how his inclination for political consultation can fit into the institutional basis. The sole proposition he could formulate for protecting people from a corrupt and a dictatorial leader was that the successor should receive proper education. In addition, the education should focus on moral philosophy together with indoctrination in the principles of an unpretentious Christian devotion. A future prince’s education should have a target of making him eager to use his power for the society good rather than for personal triumph. Erasmus was familiar with matters concerning court issues. He was aware that any ruler or royal successor would occasionally be in the midst of bad people. Such people would demand favor by influencing the leader into neglecting the interests of the general public by addressing the interests of a small group. The group of people would advise the king to adopt policies and procedures that would allow them to influence the royal policy. They would do this in ways that suit their own personal social and economic development. The educational treatise was an effort to indoctrinate young Prince Charles and to show his appreciation for the appointment as the Honorary councillor. Erasmus had limited political concepts. In his institutio treatise, he focused exclusively on the moral teaching of the future ruler through education and not on the institutions and actual policies of the state. This was contrary to the contemporary political masterpiece Utopia done by his close friend Thomas More. The emphasis on the capability of moral philosophy to plant “the seeds of morality” in the spirit of a prince is distinctive on the writings of Renaissance humanists. Erasmus despised the traditional chivalric culture of barbaric courts and aristocrats. He feared that the probability of the prince becoming corrupt was high. This would be because of external influence from people close to him. Therefore, a prince’s tutor must implant an education that will serve as “an antidote, alongside the poison of what the commoners think”. Erasmus compares masses of people to the prisoners confined in Plato’s cave. In the Institutio treatise, Erasmus praises Plato’s idea of the philosopher-king. However, in The Praise of Folly, he observes that societies with philosophers as their rulers rarely make advancements in relation to development. Erasmus anticipated that proper indoctrination of future leaders in moral philosophy and the principles of Christian life would prevent them from adopting irrational and harmful policies. Pagan and Christian concepts of political virtue Tensions between Christianity and pagan philosophy and tensions between Christianity and specific philosophical schools remained rampant in the 16th century. However, there is lack of confirmation of the continuity between ancient and Christian values in Erasmus’ Convivium religiosum (Moriarty, 2011, p.94). Pagan virtues attract a heated debate. From a Christian’s perspective, pagan virtues are in violation of Christian attributes. Christians assess such virtues in a manner that varies from an absolute denunciation of virtues as actual to the acclamation of the virtues as fundamentally correspondent to those of the Christians. In the Adagiorum chiliades work of Erasmus that made him famous, he illustrated his belief that antiquity was an undoubted determinants of achievement (Ogilvie BW, 2001, p.3). Erasmus showed both criticism and favouritism of the ancient church heads. He insisted on the need to study ancient Greek in addition to Latin. This is because the West had linguistic shortcomings that were noted by Erasmus. Latin Church fathers could not overcome the limitations. Erasmus seemed to be relying on the scripture and church fathers for the interpretation of the parable of tares (Linkels, 2013, p.53). Erasmus saw the scripture an appropriate benchmark for testing the purity of everything. According to Erasmus, the only thing that could renew the church at his time was a crucial transformation of ‘the heart’. The change would be possible through the learnt art of persuasive rhetoric applied to scripture most importantly designed to promote imitation of the right ways of Christ (Herdt, 2008, p.107) Conclusion In conclusion, situations where it is protocol to select a prince by vote, it is inappropriate to have much regard for ancestry, physical appearance or height. Family trees jewels and gold are irrelevant in governing a state than they are pertinent to a sea captain controlling his ship. People should be careful when selecting a prince. The prince should have the ability to ensure the welfare of his subjects is addressed and should disregard personal gains. Effective education demonstrates to be an obligatory work for the raising of a real Christian prince. References Erasmus, D., & Rummel, E. (1990). The Erasmus reader. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Erasmus, D., & Rummel, E., 1996. Erasmus on women. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Faber, RA., 2005. Humanitas As Discriminating Factor In The Educational Writings Of Erasmus And Luther, Dutch Review of Church History / Nederlands Archief Voor Kerkgeschiedenis, 85, 1, pp. 25-37, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 8 May 2015. Herdt, J. A., 2008. Putting on virtue the legacy of the splendid vices. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Linkels, N., 2013. Philosophy and religion in service of the Philosophia Christi. Erasmus student journal of philosophy. pp. 44- 55. Accessed from http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDIQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Frepub.eur.nl%2Fpub%2F77055%2FESJP.5.2013.04.Linkels.print.pdf&ei=96BNVZHDE4207QbSJA&usg=AFQjCNGA3AMPzimMWkgnTt3mYZnzZC4xyg&sig2=-XPSfTbvGEgNdGK4M5lYIQ&bvm=bv.92885102,d.ZGU Moriarty, M., 2011. Disguised vices: theories of virtue in early modern French thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ogilvie, BW., 2001. Exemplarity and the use of antiquity in Erasmus. University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Web. May 10, 2015. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=history_faculty_pubs Parrish, JM., 2010, Education, Erasmian humanism and Mores Utopia, Oxford Review of Education, 36, 5, pp. 589-605, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 8 May 2015. Pascal, Paul. (May 3, 2012). The Collected Works of Erasmus. Volume 10, Correspondence: Letters 1356 to 1534 (1523-1524). Bryn Mawr Classical Review 03.05.12. Web. May 10, 2015. Retrieved from http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1992/03.05.12.html Rummel, E.,2004. Erasmus. London: Continuum. Van den Dungen, P., 2009, Erasmus: The 16th Centurys Pioneer of Peace Education and a Culture of Peace, Journal Of East Asia & International Law, 2, 2, pp. 409-431, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 May 2015. Read More