Latin, or Greek? Does It Matter?

I have recently re-encountered the argument that classical Christian educators should focus their years of language classes on Greek rather than Latin. This view primarily arises because parents and educators want their students to read the New Testament in its original language. Proponents of this view suppose that, if we are to spend all this time on learning a “dead language,” why not study Greek? That way, students will, at least, be able to read the original language of Scripture. 

This attitude, however, lacks historical precedent and is pedagogically unwise. When looking to the past, we observe that Latin, by and large, has always taken precedence over Greek in the history of Western education. While there have always been dissenters to this practice, Latin is the more foundational language for classical education. The reasons for this, whether they are historical, political, or pedagogical, all point to the same reality: for millennia, students only arrived at Greek after years of Latin study. 

Here, I wish to offer a brief argument in favor of the historical view. We should consider why our ancestors held Latin in such high esteem, even when they were Christians and believed in the inspiration of the New Testament.

A Practical Consideration
Before addressing the history of Latin pedagogy in the West, it is helpful to recognize the practical benefits of beginning one’s education with Latin rather than Greek.

On the whole, Latin is simpler, more consistent, and has greater similarity to English. For these reasons, starting with Latin gives students an excellent foundation for them to learn Greek later in their education. To be sure, it is possible to begin with Greek, but this would be analogous to learning calculus before algebra–one can do it, but it is akin to learning to run before one can walk. 

To give a concrete example, the Latin third declension is generally more consistent than Greek’s third declension. While figuring out the nominative singular form of Latin can be tricky at first, only a handful of patterns are possible. Once the stem is identified, the endings can be added without much fuss.

Greek’s third declension, on the other hand, is quite complex. Not only do students need to learn a base set of third declension endings, but also how these various endings change for different stem types. This creates the rather unfortunate burden of having to learn several different “sub-types” of the third declension. 

This sort of challenge could be said for other aspects of Greek (especially the verbal system). Thus, the overall principle is that Latin provides students with plenty of fairly regular and consistent patterns to grasp before they tackle Greek. But beyond this practical consideration, there are other compelling historical reasons we should first focus on Latin. 

Latin in Antiquity: How Latin Became a Language of Culture. 
While the Greek language and culture preceded the Roman Empire, it was the Romans who passed on their language to the West. The Romans were concerned with rising above the barbarian society of their tribal past. They accomplished this not only by learning Greek, but also by refining and cultivating humanitas, the Latin word for a Greek concept: inculcating virtue to become a great orator. Thus, educated men like Cicero and Quintilian had to be fluent in both languages. The Roman poets also used their knowledge of Greek to masterfully enrich their own language. Virgil’s allusions to the Greek sources jump out at the reader in virtually every line of the Aeneid. Latin became not merely a language of the empire, but also of literature. 

The Roman Empire spread its language and culture to the entire known world—in particular, Western Europe, where Greek was not already dominant. And the Romans achieved what only the Greeks had before: a thriving high culture, in which great works of literature, architecture, philosophy, history, law, and even theology flourished. Roman high culture ensured that Latin would be a language for all educated peoples in the West. It is certainly true that Latin gained such a status because of the Romans’ insistence on learning Greek, but the Romans did not ultimately spread Greek to the empire. Instead, they used Greek to elevate and propagate their own language and culture.

Latin in the Middle Ages: How Latin was baptized. 
As the Western Roman Empire faded, its language certainly did not. Latin continued to be the language of the educated population long after it was spoken by the common people. As one author put it, the Church “baptized” Latin as Christianity took hold of Western Europe.

Greek language and culture went dormant in the West for nearly a millennium at the end of antiquity. Not until the Renaissance would Greek return as a pillar of education. Even the greatest thinkers of the Middle Ages did not have the ability to read the Greeks in their original language. Thomas Aquinas, who is known for his commentaries on Aristotle and the application of his philosophy to Christian theology, only knew Aristotle’s works through Latin translations (many of which were in themselves translations from Arabic). During the Middle Ages, authors like Aquinas worked almost entirely in Latin, the language of the academy. 

It was during this time that Latin became synonymous with the liberal art, grammar. As C.S. Lewis recounts, the word læden in Old English and leden in Middle English (both archaic spellings of the word Latin) came to mean language. At the time of the Middle Ages, Latin was used as the common language of social elites. Consequently, essentially every notable work of philosophy, theology, or history during the Middle Ages was written in Latin. In the medieval universities, teachers and students carried out their education entirely in Latin. Learning Latin was, therefore, a matter of practical necessity: anyone who wanted to study at university had to know it. This long-held pragmatism continued to ensure Latin’s prevalence in classical education. 

Latin in the Renaissance and Beyond: How Latin was Immortalized 
Along with many aspects of antiquity, the Renaissance recovered Latin, not just as a lingua franca of Europe, but as a standard for good style. The Renaissance humanists emphasized the learning of Latin for imitating the style of the Roman authors. Latin, along with the newly reinstated Greek, was a language of literature, not just scholastic theology. During the Renaissance, students learned Latin because they wished to speak like Cicero and Quintilian. 

The humanists refocused classical education’s attention on creating individuals who could rival the great authors of Rome. To accomplish this at any high level, a deep familiarity with Latin was required. This tradition continued until relatively recently; Latin was used as a language of literature and the academy roughly through the nineteenth century. Even well into the twentieth century, Latin made up an essential component of education in the West. As Simmons notes, the last generation to truly know Latin (and Greek) was roughly the generation of Lewis, Auden, and Eliot. Since that time, the few that decide to study the classics are usually doing it to become academics of “Classics,” not for any kind of “general education.” 

Because Latin was used as a lingua franca and because the Roman authors were held as stylistic ideals, Latin was the language that every student needed to master to become a well-rounded member of society. If we are to follow this tradition and interact with this stream of thought, we must know Latin. And when I say, “know Latin,” I am not, of course, referring to the memorization of some paradigms, which comprise most of our Latin teaching today. We must regain the ability to read and speak Latin with fluency—this will give us all the more fluency in interacting with the greatest works of literature. 

Conclusion: All in Due Time
“Yes, but the New Testament!” some will say. Yes, indeed, but all in due time. This argument rests on a misunderstanding to which Classical Christian Education is vehemently opposed. The fallacy assumes that Christian education is fundamentally seeking to create students of the Bible at the exclusion of everything else. Classical Christian Education has always held the Bible to be primary, but it never claims that nothing else is worth studying. In fact, Classical Christian Education argues that our reading of the Bible is only enriched when we study other great works of literature and philosophy. Our students actually become deeper Christians because they are familiar with the great authors of Rome. 

This misunderstanding applies not just to issues of Latin vs. Greek, but to entire approaches to Christian education. The founding of “Bible colleges,” for example, strikes in this direction. While many Christians are conformable with the idea of some sort of Christian education, there are those who take issue with the “classical” part. The reasoning goes something like this: Christians should not base their education on pagan literature or philosophy. After all, their mythology and cosmology “compete” with Christianity.

The doctrine of common grace is important here. We affirm that pagans have written great works of literature, and that, because Christians are seekers of God’s goodness, truth, and beauty, we ought to appreciate it wherever it may be found. One essential claim of classical Christian education is that even the pagans–especially those of the ancient world–have offered many true and beautiful ideas. We would do well to know them.

In essence, the primary argument for why Latin is predominant over Greek in the classical education tradition is that Latin is the language of the stream. Every person who was considered educated before the second half of the 20th century knew Latin, because, if they did not, they could not effectively interact with the Western intellectual tradition.

Latin, then, is the gateway into the Tradition and, within time, students will go on to learn Greek. With their Greek, they will read the New Testament and the ancient poets and philosophers. But before they can run, they must learn to walk.