Erasmus and the Unintended Reformation
Erasmus and the Unintended Reformation
Erasmus and the Unintended Reformation
In November 1520, the newly crowned Holy Roman Emperor Charles V passed through the German city of Cologne with his retinue. He was accompanied by Elector Frederick “the Wise” of Saxony, whose willingness not to vote for himself had ensured Charles’ election to the highest position in Christendom. Frederick was thus highly valued by the emperor, but he had a problem: a professor at the University of Wittenberg, the institution Frederick had founded, was in hot water with Rome and on the brink of excommunication. That professor was Martin Luther.
While in Cologne, Frederick was pressed to turn Luther over to Church authorities. But Frederick remained unconvinced that Luther was evil. He therefore sought the counsel of another member of the imperial party, Erasmus of Rotterdam, a scholar of ancient languages, satirist, and religious commentator.
Frederick and his secretary George Spalatin met quietly with Erasmus. Frederick asked a question in German: “What sin had Luther committed?” Spalatin quickly translated into Latin and Erasmus responded, “Two. He has struck at the tiara of the pope and the bellies of the monks.” [1]
The conversation did not remain secret for long, much to Erasmus’ dismay. As a long-time advocate of reform in the church, Erasmus was increasingly blamed for “laying the egg that Luther hatched.” The next few years would bring a torrent of voices calling for Erasmus to publicly oppose Luther, and for the rest of his days the issue would haunt the Great Rotterdamer.
Just who was Erasmus, and how did his life end up so intertwined with that of Martin Luther?
A Brilliant Scholar
Erasmus may have been born in the Dutch city of Rotterdam, but his childhood was spent in the smaller town of Gouda, where his father was a parish priest. Yes, Erasmus and his brother Pieter were born illegitimate, raised by their single mother. When Erasmus was about twelve years old, his parents both died during a plague epidemic, and he and Pieter were pressured into joining a monastery.
As a young man, Erasmus showed an extraordinary aptitude for Latin and classical literature. He absorbed the teachings of a lay movement known as the Brethren of the Common Life which aimed to increase personal piety and pursue The Imitation of Christ, the title of the chief work by its most famous follower, Thomas à Kempis. The specific order in which Erasmus took holy vows and was ordained to the priesthood was that of St. Augustine, ironically the same that Martin Luther would join several years later.
Erasmus longed to escape his life in the cloister. He seems to have developed romantic feelings for a fellow monk named Servatius Rogerus that ended in disappointment. In any case, his health could not endure the consecrated diet. (He may well have suffered from a food allergy.) Soon, Erasmus managed to attach himself to the bishop of Cambrai and received a dispensation to study at the University of Paris. Things did not go splendidly there either – Erasmus recalled eating rotten food and listening to endless lectures about medieval scholastics – but it was a bridge of sorts to the life he wanted to lead.
Erasmus now began a period of rapid ascendance, traveling to Italy, France, and England, becoming friends with leading intellectuals of the day, and earning the patronage of royalty. He spent time lecturing at the University of Cambridge and formed one of his closest friendships with Thomas More. It was for More that Erasmus wrote the satirical work The Praise of Folly, which became a runaway hit and made him the best-selling author in Christendom.
In works like The Handbook of a Christian Knight, Erasmus laid out his vision for reform in the Church: not a rethink of major doctrines, but a reform of clerical behavior and cleansing from superstition. He took aim at abuses in the cult of the saints and even supported the right of priests to marry.
But Erasmus saw no need to rethink the Church’s teachings about the justification of the sinner. He believed in his bones that man had free will to act righteously or unrighteously, and that even if he did not, it would be better not to publicize the fact. The advancement of society depended on good education and correct behavior. What incentive would people have to improve themselves if their eternal destiny was already set?
He believed in his bones that man had free will to act righteously or unrighteously, and that even if he did not, it would be better not to publicize the fact.
As one of the most prominent members of the Renaissance Humanist movement, Erasmus supported the recovery of ancient Greek and Latin works, which would train Christians in civic virtue. It was in this capacity that he produced a new Latin translation of the New Testament in 1516 that sparked a revolution in Biblical studies, for Erasmus had demonstrated that Jerome’s old Vulgate translation contained mistakes. These errors had led directly to doctrines like the supposed treasury of merits that saints could dispense.
So, when Martin Luther first protested abuses in the Church, Erasmus saw no problem with it. As is clear in his conversation with Frederick, Erasmus thought Luther was simply objecting to papal tyranny and clerical misbehavior. But when it became clear that Luther’s criticisms were far more fundamental, touching upon the most important issues of Church doctrine, Erasmus found himself increasingly attacked by the more conservative members of the Roman Church.
A Bitter Debate
After much prodding from popes and princes, most notably King Henry VIII of England, Erasmus was pressured into writing a public criticism of Luther’s theology. On the Freedom of the Will was released in September 1524, and while Erasmus stated in that book that man has free will in regard to salvation, he also argued that there are many doctrinal issues about which Christians simply cannot be certain. The Scriptures are ultimately confusing, and a strong magisterium in Rome is needed to interpret them properly.
The next year was one of turmoil. The German-speaking lands were consumed by a large-scale revolt known as the German Peasants’ War. As many as 100,000 people were likely killed, and Luther’s attention was entirely consumed by these events. He may also have been slow to respond to Erasmus because his associate Philip Melanchthon, like so many early Protestant reformers, was deeply indebted to Erasmus and the Humanist movement. Opposing Erasmus would mean potentially losing support for church reform, but in the end, Luther knew the doctrinal issue was too important to ignore.
Erasmus was eventually forced to flee to the city of Freiburg, one of the few cities in Germany still thoroughly loyal to Rome.
In December 1525, Luther published On the Bondage of the Will, in which he argued not only for the sovereignty of God over all aspects of salvation, but also that Christianity is a religion of assertions. To state that the Scriptures are incomprehensible on the matter of salvation itself was, for Luther, a denial of the Christian faith. As one might expect, Luther sometimes used harsh language to describe Erasmus and his arguments, though he ended up thanking the Dutchman for choosing a key area of theology for their debate rather than some secondary issue.
Erasmus was highly offended by Luther’s book and spent years working on a reply that would never gain much of an audience. Indeed, Erasmus’ most productive years were behind him. He was repeatedly plagued by poor health, and by this point many of his friends had melted away, gone the way of Luther or other reformers like Ulrich Zwingli. Erasmus was eventually forced to flee to the city of Freiburg, one of the few cities in Germany still thoroughly loyal to Rome. He died, on this day in 1536, a bitter and disappointed man.
Yet, for all this, it is hard to imagine the Reformation occurring without Erasmus. It is not the result he wanted when he sought to revitalize Biblical studies. His mind, so consumed with notions of personal improvement, could not fathom the kind of sea change in theology that Luther represented. It was a reformation he had not intended, but one that still bears his mark, for many of the early reformers had been mentored by him.
We can thank God for men like Erasmus who, though highly imperfect, nevertheless contributed (unintentionally) to the recovery of evangelical doctrine. He was a brilliant man whose life deserves to be studied and celebrated, even if one disagrees with his conclusions.
The story of Erasmus’ feud with Luther and how it affected Melanchthon will be told in Amy Mantravadi’s forthcoming novel, Broken Bonds, published by 1517.
.jpg?width=36&height=36&name=download%20(3).jpg){kind=small}
