He was born Philipp Schwartzerdt (of which "Melanchthon" is a Greek translation) on 16 February 1497, at Bretten, near Karlsruhe, where his father, Georg Schwarzerdt, was armorer to Count Palatine Philip.

In 1507 he was sent to the Latin school at Pforzheim, the rector of which, Georg Simler of Wimpfen, introduced him to the study of the Latin and Greek poets and of the philosophy of Aristotle. But he was chiefly influenced by his great-uncle, Johann Reuchlin, (as the husband of his grandmother on his maternal side) the great representative of humanism, who advised him to change his family name, Schwarzerdt (literally Black-earth), into the Greek equivalent Melanchthon (?????????).

Not yet thirteen years old, he entered in 1509 the University of Heidelberg where he studied philosophy, rhetoric, and astronomy/astrology, and was known as a good Greek scholar. Upon being refused the degree of master in 1512 on account of his youth, he went to Tübingen, where he pursued humanistic and philosophical studies, but devoted himself also to the study of jurisprudence, mathematics, astronomy/astrology, and even of medicine. While there, he was taught the technical aspects of astrology by his teacher, Johann Stöffler.

When, having completed his philosophical course, he had taken the degree of master in 1516, he began to study theology. Under the influence of men like Reuchlin and Erasmus he became convinced that true Christianity was something quite different from scholastic theology as it was taught at the university. But at that time he had not yet formed fixed opinions on theology, since later he often called Luther his spiritual father. He became conventor (repentant) in the contubernium and had to instruct younger scholars. He also lectured on oratory, on Virgil and Livy.

His first publications were an edition of Terence (1516) and his Greek grammar (1518), but he had written previously the preface to the Epistolae clarorum virorum of Reuchlin (1514).

The more strongly he felt the opposition of the scholastic party to the reforms instituted by him at the University of Tübingen, the more willingly he followed a call to University of Wittenberg as professor by Luther, whose influence brought him to the study of Scripture, especially of Paul, and so to a more living knowledge of the Evangelical doctrine of salvation.

He was present at the disputation of Leipzig (1519) as a spectator, but influenced the discussion by his comments and suggestions, so that he gave Johann Eck an excuse for an attack. In his Defensio contra Johannem Eckium (Wittenberg, 1519) he had already clearly developed the principles of the authority of Scripture and its interpretation.

Because of the interest in theology shown in his lectures on the Gospel of Matthew and the Epistle to the Romans, together with his investigations into the doctrines of Paul, he was granted the degree of bachelor of theology, and was transferred to the theological faculty. Soon he was bound closer than ever to Wittenberg by his marriage to Katharina Krapp, the mayor's daughter, a marriage contracted at his friends' urgent request, and especially Luther's (Nov. 25, 1520).

In the beginning of 1521 in his Didymi Faventini versus Thomam Placentinum pro M. Luthero oratio (Wittenberg, n.d.), he defended Luther by arguing that Luther rejected only papal and ecclesiastical practises which were at variance with Scripture, but not true philosophy and true Christianity. But while Luther was absent at Wartburg Castle, during the disturbances caused by the Zwickau prophets, there appeared for the first time the limitations of Melanchthon's nature, his lack of firmness and his diffidence against these prophets, and had it not been for the energetic interference of Luther, the prophets might not have been silenced.

The appearance of Melanchthon's Loci communes rerum theologicarum seu hypotyposes theologicae (Wittenberg and Basel, 1521) was of great importance for the confirmation and expansion of the ideas of the Reformation. In close adherence to Luther, Melanchthon presented the new doctrine of Christianity under the form of a discussion of the "leading thoughts" of the Epistle to the Romans. His purpose was not to give a systematic exposition of Christian faith, but a key to the right understanding of Scripture. Loci communes began the gradual rise of the Lutheran scholastic tradition, as the later theologians Martin Chemnitz, Mathias Haffenreffer, and Leonhard Hutter expanded upon it.

Nevertheless, he continued to lecture on the classics, and, after Luther's return, might have given up his theological work altogether, if it had not been for Luther's urging.

On a journey in 1524 to his native town, he was led to engage in negotiations with the papal legate Cardinal Lorenzo Campeggio who tried to draw him from Luther's cause, but without success either at that time or afterward. In his Unterricht der Visitatorn an die Pfarherrn im Kurfürstentum zu Sachssen (1528) Melanchthon by establishing a basis for the reform of doctrines as well as regulations for churches and schools, without any direct attack upon the supposed errors of the Catholic Church, presented clearly the Evangelical doctrine of salvation.

In 1529 he accompanied the elector to the Diet of Speyer to represent the Evangelical cause. His hopes of inducing the imperial party to a peaceable recognition of the Reformation were not fulfilled. He later repented of the friendly attitude shown by him toward the Swiss at the diet, calling Zwingli's doctrine of the Lord's Supper "an impious dogma" and confirming Luther in his attitude of non-acceptance.

The composition now known as the Augsburg Confession was laid before the Diet of Augsburg in 1530, and would come to be considered perhaps the most significant document of the Protestant Reformation. While the confession was based on Luther's Marburg and Schwabach articles, it was mainly the work of Melanchthon. Although commonly thought of as a unified statement of doctrine by the two reformers, Luther did not conceal his dissatisfaction with the irenic tone of the confession. Indeed, some would criticize Melanchthon's conduct at the Diet as unbecoming of the principle he promoted, implying that faith in the truth of his cause would logically have inspired Melanchthon to a more firm and dignified posture. Others point out that he had not sought the part of a political leader, suggesting that he seemed to lack the requisite energy and decision for such a role and may simply have been a lackluster judge of human nature. Melanchthon's subsequent Apology of the Augsburg Confession reveals further doctrinal strains with Luther.

Melanchthon then settled into the comparative quiet of his academic and literary labors. His most important theological work of this period was the Commentarii in Epistolam Pauli ad Romanos (Wittenberg, 1532), noteworthy for introducing the idea that "to be justified" means "to be accounted just," whereas the Apology had placed side by side the meanings of "to be made just" and "to be accounted just." Melanchthon's increasing fame gave occasion for several honorable calls to Tübingen (Sept., 1534), to France, and to England, but consideration of the elector caused him to refuse them.

He took an important part in the discussions concerning the Lord's Supper which began in 1531. He approved fully of the Wittenberg Concord sent by Bucer to Wittenberg, and at the instigation of the Landgrave of Hesse discussed the question with Bucer in Kassel, at the end of 1534. He eagerly labored for an agreement, for his patristic studies and the Dialogue (1530) of ?colampadius had made him doubt the correctness of Luther's doctrine. Moreover, after the death of Zwingli and the change of the political situation his earlier scruples in regard to a union lost their weight. Bucer did not go so far as to believe with Luther that the true body of Christ in the Lord's Supper is bitten by the teeth, but admitted the offering of the body and blood in the symbols of bread and wine. Melanchthon discussed Bucer's views with the most prominent adherents of Luther; but Luther himself would not agree to a mere veiling of the dispute. Melanchthon's relation to Luther was not disturbed by his work as a mediator, although Luther for a time suspected that Melanchthon was "almost of the opinion of Zwingli"; nevertheless he desired to "share his heart with him."

During his sojourn in Tübingen in 1536 Melanchthon was severely attacked by Cordatus, preacher in Niemeck, because he had taught that works are necessary for salvation. In the second edition of his Loci (1535) he abandoned his earlier strict doctrine of determinism which went even beyond that of Augustine, and in its place taught more clearly his so-called Synergism. He repulsed the attack of Cordatus in a letter to Luther and his other colleagues by stating that he had never departed from their common teachings on this subject, and in the Antinomian Controversy of 1537 Melanchthon was in harmony with Luther.

The last eventful and sorrowful period of his life began with controversies over the Interims and the Adiaphora (1547). It is true, Melanchthon rejected the Augsburg Interim, which the emperor tried to force upon the defeated Protestants; but in the negotiations concerning the so-called Leipzig Interim he made concessions which many feel can in no way be justified, even if one considers his difficult position, opposed as he was to the elector and the emperor.

In agreeing to various Roman usages, Melanchthon started from the opinion that they are adiaphora if nothing is changed in the pure doctrine and the sacraments which Jesus instituted, but he disregarded the position that concessions made under such circumstances have to be regarded as a denial of Evangelical convictions.

Melanchthon himself perceived his faults in the course of time and repented of them, perhaps having to suffer more than was just in the displeasure of his friends and the hatred of his enemies. From now on until his death he was full of trouble and suffering. After Luther's death he became the "theological leader of the German Reformation," not indisputably, however; for the Lutherans with Matthias Flacius at their head accused him and his followers of heresy and apostasy. Melanchthon bore all accusations and calumnies with admirable patience, dignity, and self-control.

In his controversy on justification with Andreas Osiander Melanchthon satisfied all parties. Melanchthon took part also in a controversy with Stancari, who held that Christ was our justification only according to his human nature.

He was also still a strong opponent of the Roman Catholics, for it was by his advice that the elector of Saxony declared himself ready to send deputies to a council to be convened at Trent, but only under the condition that the Protestants should have a share in the discussions, and that the Pope should not be considered as the presiding officer and judge. As it was agreed upon to send a confession to Trent, Melanchthon drew up the Confessio Saxonica which is a repetition of the Augsburg Confession, discussing, however, in greater detail, but with moderation, the points of controversy with Rome. Melanchthon on his way to Trent at Dresden saw the military preparations of Maurice of Saxony, and after proceeding as far as Nuremberg, returned to Wittenberg in March 1552, for Maurice had turned against the emperor. Owing to his act, the condition of the Protestants became more favorable and were still more so at the Peace of Augsburg (1555), but Melanchthon's labors and sufferings increased from that time.

The last years of his life were embittered by the disputes over the Interim and the freshly started controversy on the Lord's Supper. As the statement "good works are necessary for salvation" appeared in the Leipzig Interim, its Lutheran opponents attacked in 1551 Georg Major, the friend and disciple of Melanchthon, so Melanchthon dropped the formula altogether, seeing how easily it could be misunderstood.

But all his caution and reservation did not hinder his opponents from continually working against him, accusing him of synergism and Zwinglianism. At the Colloquy of Worms in 1557 which he attended only reluctantly, the adherents of Flacius and the Saxon theologians tried to avenge themselves by thoroughly humiliating Melanchthon, in agreement with the malicious desire of the Roman Catholics to condemn all heretics, especially those who had departed from the Augsburg Confession, before the beginning of the conference. As this was directed against Melanchthon himself, he protested, so that his opponents left, greatly to the satisfaction of the Roman Catholics who now broke off the colloquy, throwing all blame upon the Protestants. The Reformation in the sixteenth century did not experience a greater insult, as Nietzsche says.

Nevertheless, Melanchthon persevered in his efforts for the peace of the Church, suggesting a synod of the Evangelical party and drawing up for the same purpose the Frankfurt Recess, which he defended later against the attacks of his enemies.

More than anything else the controversies on the Lord's Supper embittered the last years of his life. The renewal of this dispute was due to the victory in the Reformed Church of the Calvinistic doctrine and its influence upon Germany. To its tenets Melanchthon never gave his assent, nor did he use its characteristic formulas. The personal presence and self-impartation of Christ in the Lord's Supper were especially important for Melanchthon; but he did not definitely state how body and blood are related to this. Although rejecting the physical act of mastication, he nevertheless assumed the real presence of the body of Christ and therefore also a real self-impartation. Melanchthon differed from Calvin also in emphasizing the relation of the Lord's Supper to justification.

Melanchthon viewed any veneration of saints rather critically but developed positive commentaries about Mary. In his Annotations in Evangelia commenting on Lk 2,52, he discusses the faith of Mary, “she kept all things in her heart” which to Melanchton is a call to the Church to follow her example. During the marriage at Cana, Melanchton points out that Mary went too far, asking for more wine, misusing her position. But she was not upset, when Jesus gently scolded her. Mary was negligent, when she lost her son in the temple, but she did not sin. Mary was conceived with original sin like every other human being, but she was spared the consequences of it. Consequently, Melanchton opposed the feast of the Immaculate Conception, which in his days, although not dogma, was celebrated in several cities and had been approved at the Council of Basel in 1439. He declared that the Immaculate Conception was an invention of monks. Mary is a representation (Typus) of the Church and in the Magnificat, Mary spoke for the whole Church. Standing under the cross, Mary suffered like no other human being. Consequently Christians have to unite with her under the Cross, in order to become Christ-like.

But before these and other theological dissensions were ended, he died; a few days before this event he committed to writing his reasons for not fearing it. On the left were the words, "Thou shalt be delivered from sins, and be freed from the acrimony and fury of theologians"; on the right, "Thou shalt go to the light, see God, look upon his Son, learn those wonderful mysteries which thou hast not been able to understand in this life." The immediate cause of death was a severe cold which he had contracted on a journey to Leipzig in March, 1560, followed by a fever that consumed his strength, weakened by many sufferings.

The only care that occupied him until his last moment was the desolate condition of the Church. He strengthened himself in almost uninterrupted prayer, and in listening to passages of Scripture. Especially significant did the words seem to him, "His own received him not; but as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God." When Caspar Peucer (q.v.), his son in-law, asked him if he wanted anything, he replied, "Nothing but heaven." His body was laid beside Luther's in the Schloßkirche in Wittenberg.

He is commemorated in the Calendar of Saints of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod on February 16 and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America on June 25.

Melanchthon's importance for the Reformation lay essentially in the fact that he systematized Luther's ideas, defended them in public, and made them the basis of a religious education. These two, by complementing each other, could be said to have harmoniously achieved the results of the Reformation. Melanchthon was impelled by Luther to work for the Reformation; his own inclinations would have kept him a student. Without Luther's influence Melanchthon would have been "a second Erasmus," although his heart was filled with a deep religious interest in the Reformation. While Luther scattered the sparks among the people, Melanchthon by his humanistic studies won the sympathy of educated people and scholars for the Reformation. Besides Luther's strength of faith, Melanchthon's many-sidedness and calmness, as well as his temperance and love of peace, had a share in the success of the movement.

Both men had a clear consciousness of their mutual position and the divine necessity of their common calling. Melanchthon wrote in 1520, "I would rather die than be separated from Luther," whom he afterward compared to Elijah, and called "the man full of the Holy Ghost." In spite of the strained relations between them in the last years of Luther's life, Melanchthon exclaimed at Luther's death, "Dead is the horseman and chariot of Israel who ruled the Church in this last age of the world!"

On the other hand, Luther wrote of Melanchthon, in the preface to Melanchthon's Commentary on the Galatians (1529), "I had to fight with rabble and devils, for which reason my books are very warlike. I am the rough pioneer who must break the road; but Master Philipp comes along softly and gently, sows and waters heartily, since God has richly endowed him with gifts." Luther also did justice to Melanchthon's teachings, praising one year before his death in the preface to his own writings Melanchthon's revised Loci above them and calling Melanchthon "a divine instrument which has achieved the very best in the department of theology to the great rage of the devil and his scabby tribe." It is remarkable that Luther, who vehemently attacked men like Erasmus and Bucer, when he thought that truth was at stake, never spoke directly against Melanchthon, and even during his melancholy last years conquered his temper.

The strained relation between these two men never came from external things, such as human rank and fame, much less from other advantages, but always from matters of Church and doctrine, and chiefly from the fundamental difference of their individualities; they repelled and attracted each other "because nature had not formed out of them one man." However, it can not be denied that Luther was the more magnanimous, for however much he was at times dissatisfied with Melanchthon's actions, he never uttered a word against his private character; but Melanchthon, on the other hand, sometimes evinced a lack of confidence in Luther. In a letter to Carlowitz he complained that Luther on account of his polemical nature exercised a personally humiliating pressure upon him.

His work as reformer

As a reformer, Melanchthon was characterized by moderation, conscientiousness, caution, and love of peace; but these qualities were sometimes said to only be lack of decision, consistence, and courage. Often, however, his actions are shown stemming not from anxiety for his own safety, but from regard for the welfare of the community and for the quiet development of the Church.

Melanchthon was not said to lack personal courage, but rather he was said to be less of an aggressive than of a passive nature. When he was reminded how much power and strength Luther drew from his trust in God, he answered, "If I myself do not do my part, I can not expect anything from God in prayer." His nature was seen to be inclined to suffer with faith in God that he would be released from every evil rather than to act valiantly with his aid.

The distinction between Luther and Melanchthon is well brought out in Luther's letters to the latter (June, 1530): "To your great anxiety by which you are made weak, I am a cordial foe; for the cause is not ours. It is your philosophy, and not your theology, which tortures you so,-- as though you could accomplish anything by your useless anxieties. So far as the public cause is concerned, I am well content and satisfied; for I know that it is right and true, and, what is more, it is the cause of Christ and God himself. For that reason, I am merely a spectator. If we fall, Christ will likewise fall; and if he fall, I would rather fall with Christ than stand with the emperor."

Another trait of his character was his love of peace. He had an innate aversion to quarrels and discord; yet, often he was very irritable. His irenical character often led him to adapt himself to the views of others, as may be seen from his correspondence with Erasmus and from his public attitude from the Diet of Augsburg to the Interim. It was said not to be merely a personal desire for peace, but his conservative religious nature that guided him in his acts of conciliation. He never could forget that his father on his death-bed had besought his family "never to leave the Church." He stood toward the history of the Church in an attitude of piety and reverence that made it much more difficult for him than for Luther to be content with the thought of the impossibility of a reconciliation with the Roman Catholic Church. He laid stress upon the authority of the Fathers, not only of Augustine, but also of the Greeks.

His attitude in matters of worship was conservative, and in the Leipsic Interim he was said by Cordatus and Schenk even to be Crypto-Catholic. He never strove for a reconciliation with Roman Catholicism at the price of pure doctrine. He attributed more value to the external appearance and organization of the Church than Luther did, as can be seen from his whole treatment of the "doctrine of the Church." The ideal conception of the Church, which the Reformers opposed to the organization of the Roman Church, which was expressed in his Loci of 1535, lost for him after 1537 its former prominence, when he began to emphasize the conception of the true visible Church as it may be found among the Evangelicals.

The relation of the Church to God he found in the divinely ordered office, the ministry of the Gospel. The universal priesthood was for Melanchthon as for Luther no principle of an ecclesiastical constitution, but a purely religious principle. In accordance with this idea Melanchthon tried to keep the traditional church constitution and government, including the bishops. He did not want, however, a church altogether independent of the State, but rather, in agreement with Luther, he believed it the duty of the secular authorities to protect religion and the Church. He looked upon the consistories as ecclesiastical courts which therefore should be composed of spiritual and secular judges, for to him the official authority of the Church did not lie in a special class of priests, but rather in the whole congregation, to be represented therefore not only by ecclesiastics, but also by laymen. Melanchthon in advocating church union did not overlook differences in doctrine for the sake of common practical tasks.

The older he grew, the less he distinguished between the Gospel as the announcement of the will of God, and right doctrine as the human knowledge of it. Therefore he took pains to safeguard unity in doctrine by theological formulas of union, but these were made as broad as possible and were restricted to the needs of practical religion.

As scholar

As a scholar Melanchthon embodied the entire spiritual culture of his age. At the same time he found the simplest, clearest, and most suitable form for his knowledge; therefore his manuals, even if they were not always original, were quickly introduced into schools and kept their place for more than a century.

Knowledge had for him no purpose of its own; it existed only for the service of moral and religious education, and so the teacher of Germany prepared the way for the religious thoughts of the Reformation. He is the father of Christian humanism, which has exerted a lasting influence upon scientific life in Germany. [But it is Erasmus who is called, "The Prince of the Humanists.]

His works were not always new and original, but they were clear, intelligible, and answered their purpose. His style is natural and plain, better, however, in Latin and Greek than in German. He was not without natural eloquence, although his voice was weak.

As theologian

As a theologian, Melanchthon did not show so much creative ability, but rather a genius for collecting and systematizing the ideas of others, especially of Luther, for the purpose of instruction. He kept to the practical, and cared little for connection of the parts, so his Loci were in the form of isolated paragraphs.

The fundamental difference between Luther and Melanchthon lies not so much in the latter's ethical conception, as in his humanistic mode of thought which formed the basis of his theology and made him ready not only to acknowledge moral and religious truths outside of Christianity, but also to bring Christian truth into closer contact with them, and thus to mediate between Christian revelation and ancient philosophy.

Melanchthon's views differed from Luther's only in some modifications of ideas. Melanchthon looked upon the law as not only the correlate of the Gospel, by which its effect of salvation is prepared, but as the unchangeable order of the spiritual world which has its basis in God himself. He furthermore reduced Luther's much richer view of redemption to that of legal satisfaction. He did not draw from the vein of mysticism running through Luther's theology, but emphasized the ethical and intellectual elements.

After giving up determinism and absolute predestination and ascribing to man a certain moral freedom, he tried to ascertain the share of free will in conversion, naming three causes as concurring in the work of conversion, the Word, the Spirit, and the human will, not passive, but resisting its own weakness. Since 1548 he used the definition of freedom formulated by Erasmus, "the capability of applying oneself to grace."