Begfljertus! €ra£mu£

Djyinity Library

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE LIBRARY OF THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL

Paper read before the Berkeley Club, March 18, 1920.
The quotations from the writings of Erasmus are translations
by Hallam, Froude, Allen, Emerton,
Hazlitt and others.

BY
WARREN OLNEY

¥

SAN FRANCISCO:
PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION BY
JOHN HENRY NASH
1920

Besfoerius Erasmus
UNDOUBTEDLY Erasmus was the greatest
scholar, writer, wit and philosopher of his age.
If we consider the state of civilization of his
time, the small amount of actual knowledge
then possessed by mankind and the limitations
of his environment, it will be hard to point out a man in
history who was his equal in clearness of vision, literary
excellence and learning. The combination of these quali
ties in one man will always make Erasmus a notable figure
in the development of our race.
He was born out of wedlock in Rotterdam, Holland, in
1466 or 1467, probably in the former year. His father was
a priest. Of his mother almost nothing is known. In that
age the birth of children to a priest, notwithstanding his
vows of celibacy, was so common an occurrence as to oc
casion little or no scandal. The father of the famous scholar
Agricola was a priest and boasted of two pieces of good
fortune that came to him the same day, the birth of his
son and a clerical promotion. The father of Erasmus seems
to have been a man of some private fortune, for on his
death, when Erasmus was thirteen, he left an estate that
his son always claimed was amply sufficient to meet the
expenses of the education of himself and an older brother,
but was wasted by guardians. Of the older brother we
know nothing except that in a letter Erasmus speaks
rather contemptuously of him as caring nothing for learn
ing, and loving bodily ease and comfort. 1

SDeSiDmufi At the age of nine, Erasmus was placed with his brother
CtaStlTUS m tne Deventer School, of which Agricola was master,
the most famous school of the age. His mother seems to
have accompanied her sons to care for them. This and
the notice of her death are the only references to her
that I find, except the story told by Jortin in his life of
Erasmus, upon which Charles Reade based his romance
of The Cloister and Hearth. There seems to be no au
thority for Jortin's story, and it is inconsistent with the
fact that she had two sons and Erasmus was the younger.
He remained in this famous school for four years, catch
ing up with the older scholars. In after years his expres
sions of dissatisfaction with his school days was very
likely his dissatisfaction with his teachers. It is certain
that through all his later student days his mind was so
quick and active that he outran his teachers. And when
he tried to be a teacher himself, he was so bored by the
dullness of his pupils that nothing short of absolute ne
cessity could keep him at his task.
His father and mother both died of the plague when he
was thirteen. The next three years, or until he was six
teen, were spent in a school which I take to have been
much like the schools of the Christian Brothers of the
present. His studies were then interrupted by long sick
ness. On recovering he was then, as he always afterwards
claimed, forced into a monastery by his guardians, who
had wasted his estate. He declares that he strongly ob
jected, that his desire was to devote himself to the new
learning then making such a stir in Europe, and a mon
astery was no place for him to pursue his studies. He
wanted to go to a university.
It was the same spirit that has over and over again been
exhibited by the bright boy against dull parents. "He
wants to go to college." Erasmus at sixteen cared for
nothing apparently except learning. The amusements of
boys of his age did not interest him. He was delicate
physically. The Renaissance was spreading from Italy to

all Europe. Printing had come into vogue and numerous EDCgtOfTtUS
editions of the Latin classics were being issued. Notwith- flfragittttg
standing the clerical objections to the study of Greek,
eager minds, hungry for knowledge, were groping through
the mysteries of an unknown language with a vision be
fore them of a new world of literature. It is evident that
this boy of sixteen was already in sympathy with the zeal,
the thirst for knowledge that made this age the most re
markable in human history, excepting always our own.
Without the means of subsistence at a university, with
guardians insisting on a monastery, an older friend to
whom he was much attached picturing to him the oppor
tunities he would have for study in a monastery, the re
sult could be foreseen. He took the preliminary vows of a
monk, assumed the monastic dress and— hated monas
teries and monks ever after.
He spent four years in the monastery, and though in
after life he denounced monks and their ways of life with
great power and bitterness, yet he certainly did pursue
his studies there, for at twenty he had acquired a reputa
tion for learning, ready wit and literary ability. There are
some minds so richly endowed and so imbued with a love
of learning that a university course is merely an aid, not a
necessity. When about twenty, the Bishop of Cambrai, con
templating a visit to Rome, wanted a Latin secretary. The
Bishop either knew him or had heard of him, and procured
for him a dispensation permitting him to leave the mon
astery to accompany him on the proposed j ourney to Rome .
The dispensation, however, did not permit him to leave off
all the monastic dress. This badge of monkdom was so
hateful to him that after he became famous he procured,
by direct appeal to the Pope, an additional dispensation
allowing him to discard the last vestige of monkish dress.
At twenty he left the monastery, never to return, and
entered the service of the Bishop of Cambrai. For some
unknown reason the journey of the Bishop to Rome did
not take place, but Erasmus spent about five years in his

SPtStofriufi household, where he pursued his studies with unabated
dErafinlUfi zea'- **e made visits, but for how much time is unknown,
to the then and still celebrated University of Louvain,
probably for the purpose of study in that library, de
stroyed by the Germans in 1914. It is reasonably certain
that he already knew as much as the professors, and, as
later when prosecuting his studies in Greek, was dissatis
fied with the best instructors because they could teach
him little.
In 1492, the year of America's discovery, he took some
additional vows as a priest at Utrecht. He was now twenty-
five, with much local reputation as a scholar, wit and
poet. Little of his verse has come down to us, for at an
early age he gave up versifying. Shortly before all Europe
was reading his prose, he made a visit with Sir Thomas
More to the children of Henry VII, where he was intro
duced to the young Prince Henry, afterwards Henry VIII.
Erasmus says that the prince asked him for a poem, and
that on returning to his lodgings he composed some verse
in honor of the prince with much difficulty, because he
had given up that branch of literature.
Returning to his twenty -fifth year, we see a young man
with much local reputation for wit and learning, but hun
gering for more knowledge and a sight of the great world.
The worthy Bishop consented to his going to Paris to
study at the University there, and promised him an allow
ance sufficient, as the Bishop thought, for his necessary
expenses. Here, with a few sentences, I shall dismiss the
unpleasant story of his pecuniary troubles that lasted
until fame came to him. Much criticism has been expressed
of Erasmus' efforts to secure support from wealthy
friends. He did, when a student, solicit funds from
wealthy friends, and in mature life accepted gifts from
those who were in sympathy with him. This is the charge.
But the man, and the times in which he lived, must be
considered. As to the man: He had little thrift or ideas of economy.

He felt strongly that he was entitled to a comfortable SDEgigcrtuS
support, and his delicate and infirm body required it. He (SfctUgmvuS
maintained that he must have enough income to pursue
his studies in reasonable comfort and felt that his great
and wealthy friends (he had plenty of them) ought to
furnish that income. It should be observed that it was
only from those whom he supposed were in sympathy
with him that he would accept gifts.
Repeatedly he turned down the most seductive offers
from popes and kings rather than surrender his freedom.
He felt and said, all through his career, that he must be
free from obligation to the great that would come from
accepting the honors or emoluments of office. His freedom,
he said, was dearer to him than honors or gold. After his
reputation was established his friends and admirers gave
him enough for his comfortable support. His English
friends were specially generous to him.
As to the times: In those days the scholar and writer
were dependent on patrons for support, and it was not
considered disgraceful for the poor scholar or poet to have
friends solicit for him, or for himself to solicit, gifts of
money from the wealthy. There was no copyright in those
days. No author, ancient or modern, had such a contem
porary constituency as Erasmus. No other author's pub
lications ever had so many readers in his own lifetime. In
that respect he is in a class by himself. If there had been
a copyright law, such as we now have, it would have made
him a millionaire.
With promise of an allowance from the Bishop, he went
to Paris, professedly to attend the University. In fact,
the University had nothing to teach him and he spent
little time within its walls. His reputation for wit and
learning had preceded him, and he was heartily welcomed
by the writers and scholars of the great city. There are
indications that his life in Paris was a gay one, but whether
it was or not, there is no doubt he did not change his
habits of study. All the Latin classics were now at his

HDttfiDmufi fingers' end. The clergy opposed the study of Greek, but
(tafitltttS m spite of opposition, and without grammars or diction
aries, the language was being mastered by a few. Erasmus
took up the new study with his customary zeal and in
dustry. In one of his letters he says: "I have given up my
whole soul to Greek, and as soon as I get some money I
shall buy Greek books and then some clothes." He spent
six years in Paris, with visits more or less prolonged to
his native land. The allowance made by the Bishop was
not sufficient and he eked out his income by taking pupils.
Though he hated teaching, he became much attached to
some of his pupils and they to him. One of his Paris pupils
was William Blount, the heir of Lord Montjoy, an Eng
lish nobleman. Between teacher and pupil an attachment
arose that lasted their joint lives. In 1498 Montjoy per
suaded Erasmus to visit England with him. There, in the
language of today, Erasmus had the time of his life. He
was thirty -one, in the full vigor of young manhood, with
a reputation much increased by his six years in Paris.
The fact that he was the guest of a young and popular
nobleman naturally attracted attention. Immediately he
was welcomed by as great a galaxy of ability and virtue
as England ever possessed. Warham was Archbishop of
Canterbury, and thereafter as long as he lived was the
friend and patron of Erasmus. Thomas More then was
only eighteen, but already recognized as a coming light of
the world. As long as he lived he was Erasmus' most inti
mate friend. It is said that at a Lord Mayor's dinner, Eras
mus and More, without previous introduction and not
knowing each other, were seated near each other. They
got to talking and then to arguing some proposition that
one of them advanced. The discussion becoming quite
warm, Erasmus said: "You can be nobody but More,"
to which More replied, "You are Erasmus or the devil."*
*This well-known story is thought they say, More was too young at the
by the biographers of both More and time of their first meeting. But though
Erasmus to be apocryphal, because, More was very young at the time of

But at this particular period the man who evidently W>t&i0ttiu3
most impressed Erasmus was Colet. Of him, suffice it to (gjagflmg
say that with great talents and learning he tried to live as
Christ would have him live. Christ was his lodestar. And
now we see the gay, young, learned Erasmus, already
thoroughly disgusted with the superstitions of the church
of his time, and turning his thoughts to the early church
of the apostles and its founder, finding in his friend a
shining light illuminating his mind. He says he spent much
time with Colet and their talk was all of Christ and how
to live like him. Colet did live like him. Erasmus not al
ways. He had too much temper, and was too easily peeved
by criticism to be as nearly a perfect man as his friend.
But, for the balance of his life, Christ was ever in his mind.
Here with Colet probably came the inspiration that moved
him to his great work of the translation of the New Testa
ment. Here it may be well to enlarge a little on what must
seem strange to one unacquainted with the history of this
time, viz: the ability of Erasmus to converse so easily
with his English friends. At that time Latin was the uni
versal, all-prevailing language of the intelligent portion of
Christendom. Educated men wrote in Latin, conversed in
Latin, thought in Latin. There is no evidence that Eras
mus, born in Holland, but living all his mature life in
England, France, Germany and Italy, knew any modern
language save his vernacular. Likewise there is no evidence
that he suffered any inconvenience in his numerous jour
neys from not knowing the language of the different coun-
Erasmus' first visit to England, he al- Colet had said of him, "There is but
ready had a reputation surpassing that one wit in England and that is young
of any youth of whom I have read. His Thomas More." At twenty-four, as
father took him away from Oxford member of the House of Commons, he
about the time of Erasmus' first visit led Parliament in the resistance to a
and set him to studying law. He was tyrant king's demand for money.
already the author of English and Therefore the reason given by the bio-
Latin poems of sufficient merit to have graphers for not believing this story is
come down to us, and is supposed to not sound. If such a story is older than
have already written the first history Erasmus and More, which is not im-
composed in the English language, his probable, that would not be disproof
life of Edward V and Richard III. At that these two men reenacted the story
twenty his public lectures in London when they first met.
were attracting general attention.

SDcSiomtlS tries through which he traveled. Frequently he complained
<B;raSmu0 °f tne badness of the inns. The description of a German
inn in Reade's Cloister and Hearth is taken from one of
his letters. It seems therefore that the statement that even
inn-keepers knew enough Latin to meet the requirements
of guests is probably true.
On this, his first visit to England, Erasmus seems to
have spent most of his time at Oxford, where he pursued
his Greek studies with Grocyn, a notable man of his time,
and especially devoted to Greek. Colet tried to get Eras
mus to settle at Oxford as a professor and join him in ex
pounding the doctrines of Christianity in the light of
reason and common sense. Just why this offer was de
clined is not certainly known. It is evident that as early
as this time he was possessed with the idea of a mission to
clear away the absurdities of the theologians and of the
dogmas of the church, and bring forward the simple truths
enunciated by Christ and the first apostles. As yet I have
not found that he at any time maintained any conception
of God other than that of fatherhood, but I do find that
continually, through his whole life, in season and out of
season, he held up Christ as the exemplar of all goodness
and virtue. It seems probable that he had doubts of im
mortality, for in writing about More he expresses much
pleasure that More was fully satisfied with the evidence
in favor of immortality, as much as to say that he wished
he himself were entirely satisfied with the evidence. But
however that may be, this is certain, that his two main
objects were, first, to increase the knowledge of men, and
second, to persuade men to imitate Christ in their lives.
His idea was that if men live properly in this world, the
rest will take care of itself.
But returning to his refusal of a professorship at Oxford,
Emerton thinks that it was because he could not and
would not put his neck in a yoke. I am inclined to think
that was not all of the reasons, that he had larger plans in
view and feared he might have to teach too much, a busi-
8

ness that he detested. At any rate, he did decline, and SDestocltltS
thereby, Emerton says, Oxford lost a professor, but the (flJrajfmuS
world gained a man.
After about two years spent in England, he returned to
France and published his first book, Adagia. This book
is a collection of sayings or adages of great men, proverbs,
epigrams, anecdotes, with his remarks or notes upon them.
It was these notes that gave life and interest to the col
lection. Here he first plies the whip on the backs of the
clergy of his time. Here, too, he first assails the political
evils of his time and upbraids kings for their follies and
crimes. Here is a sentence: "Let any one turn over the
pages of ancient or modern history— scarcely in several
generations will you find one or two princes whose folly
has not inflicted the greatest misery on mankind." Again
he says, "Do we not see that noble cities are erected by the
people : that they are destroyed by princes? That the com
munity grows rich by the industry of its citizens— is plun
dered by the rapacity of its princes? That good laws are
enacted by popular magistrates— are violated by these
princes? That the people love peace: that princes excite
war?" Here is one more quotation: "Towns are burned,
lands are wasted, temples are plundered, innocent citizens
are slaughtered, while the prince is playing at dice or danc
ing, or amusing himself with puppets, or hunting or
drinking." The author's reputation throughout all Europe was made
at once. The book had a prodigious sale. No less than
sixty-two editions were issued in the author's lifetime.
The clergy of loose lives howled with rage. The better
class were delighted. For instance: Archbishop Warham,
his English friend, was so pleased that he carried the book
wherever he went and was enthusiastic in its praise. He
sent Erasmus money, offered him a benefice if he would
return to England. Erasmus declined to return. He now
had the ear of Europe and probably was already at work
on his translation of the New Testament.

2D EStoer tU0 His next publication was the Euchiridion or Chris tian
CraSntufi Soldier's Manual. This little treatise, like his Adagia,
had an immense circulation all over Europe. It is horta
tory in character, and is a powerful appeal to live a good
life, to follow Christ. In the modern phrase, and in a good
sense, it has "punch." But though received by the public
with immense applause, yet afterwards it was claimed
that it contained the seeds of the terrible rebellion against
the Church that soon followed. This was because the little
book emphasized right living as the way of salvation. One
of the charges made against him was that he had denied
the existence of a real hell. He replied that he had not
denied it— that he merely declared the existence of hell
was more clearly taught in theology than in the Scriptures.
In a preface to later editions, speaking of those who
claimed to be pastors and doctors of theology, he says:
"They could never have enough of discussing in what
words they ought to speak of Christ, as if they were deal
ing with some horrid demon, who would bring destruction
upon them if they failed to invoke him in proper terms,
instead of a most gentle Savior, who asks nothing of us
but a pure and upright life." You have here the creed of
Erasmus: "A most gentle Savior, who asks nothing from
us but a pure and upright life." Keeping this in mind, it
is not hard to understand why Erasmus could not endure
the creeds of Luther or Calvin and refused to give those
creeds his support.
He now again visited England, spending a large part of
his time with Sir Thomas More. Then we find him in
Italy, where he spent a few years, and obtained his Doc
tor's Degree from the University of Turin. At Bologna he
saw the warrior Pope Julius II make his triumphant entry
into the conquered city, with all the splendor that accom
panied a successful Roman warrior's triumph. In Rome
he-was cordially received by the magnates of the Church
and became personally acquainted with Cardinal Medici,
afterwards Pope Leo X.
10

He then returned to England, and in 1509 published a SDegtuEriuS
little book that caused the world of his time to grin and flgragnutfii
then to think, the Praise of Folly. The title was Moria,
the Greek word for folly, and a pun on the name of Thomas
More, who had inspired its publication. It was issued in
1509, eight years before Luther began his contest with the
Church. Whether or not Luther was influenced by its
sarcasm on indulgencies and his excoriation of the popes
and the clergy, I cannot say, for I have found no state
ment on the subject, but it is not probable that Luther
was unacquainted with what all Europe was talking about.
It is reasonably certain that Luther had a general ac
quaintance with the books put out by Erasmus.*
There is an ethical quality running all through Eras
mus' writings, and his Praise of Folly, though jesting
with the faults and weaknesses of mankind, contained a
moral obvious to thinking men. The book purports to be
an oration by Folly, a female, the offspring of Wealth and
Youth. Decked out in the garb of the professional fool of
that age, with cap, bells, etc., she mounts a rostrum and
addresses a mixed audience of all classes and conditions
of men. The subject is praise of herself as the goddess
whom all men follow. To prove that all men are her fol
lowers, she calls to mind the follies of different classes. I
can only refer to a few instances cited by Folly in proof of
her assertion. First, of indulgences and pardons for sins—
and recollect when this was published Luther was still a
devout monk— Folly says :
"But what shall I say of those who flatter themselves so sweetly
with false pardons for their crimes, who have measured the duration
of Purgatory without an error, as if by a water clock into ages, years,
months and days. Now suppose me some tradesman or soldier or
judge, who by paying out a penny from all his stealings thinks the
whole slough of his life is cleaned out at once— all his perjuries, lusts,
drunkenness, all his quarrels, murders, cheats, treacheries, false-
*Since this was in type I have seen an Luther in a letter spoke of "Our Eras-
article in the English Historical Re- ran."
view which states that as early as 1517 11

HDt&iHt flUBf hoods, bought off by a bargain, and bought off in such a way that
-£ he may now begin over again with a new circle of crimes. And is it
VttasntUS not much the same thing when the several countries claim for them
selves each its special saint, with his special function and his special
forms of worship; this one is good for toothache, that one helps
women in travail, another restores stolen property; this one shines
upon shipwreck and that one takes care of the flocks. There are some
that are good for more things than one, and of these especially the
Virgin Mother of God, to whom the mass of men now pay more
honor than to the Son. The apostles prayed to God; they did not
know that to pray to a figure drawn with charcoal on a wall would be
equally efficacious."
Then Folly claims that all these things that men get
from saints are appurtenances of folly. She says the world
is full of fools, yet the priests are glad to get them all for
their profit. Then she continues:
"But if some hateful wise man were to arise and say what is true—
to live well is the way to die well; you will best get rid of your sins by
hatred of vice, tears, vigils, prayers and fasting and a better life, the
saint will help you if you imitate his life— I say if a wise man were to
come prating such stuff as this, how much happiness he would de
stroy and what trouble he would bring upon mortalsl"
The philosophers and theologians of his time came in for
a roasting without a parallel so far as my knowledge of
polemics goes. Then he takes up the religious orders and
leaves little to be said in the way of accusation and de
nunciation. One sentence I will give:
"But Christ will interrupt this endless bragging and will demand:
'Whence this new kind of Judaism? One law and that my own I
recognize, and that is the only thing I hear nothing about. In that
day, using no twisted parables, I promised openly the inheritance of
my Father, not to cowls and prayers and fastings, but to deeds of
love.' "
I will close this account of Folly's address by her refer
ence to the popes. Bear in mind that Alexander VI had
died shortly before, and Julius was then on the throne,
and observe the intimations of the crimes by which they
attained their places. Folly says:
"Those supreme pontiffs, who stand in the place of Christ, if they
should try to imitate his life, that is, his poverty, his toil, his teach-
12

tag, his cross, and his scorn of this world, or if they should think of 33Dt#it)triU0
the meaning of 'pope,' that is, 'father' or even of 'most holy,' what /ifcM»(*mttrf
position in the world could be more dreadful? Who would buy it with tlfcMUHutt*
all his resources, or, when he had bought it, would defend it by sword
and poison and every violence? What joys they would lose if once
wisdom should get hold of them. Wisdom say I, nay, even a grain of
the salt Christ tells us of. What wealth, what honors, riches, con
quests, dispensations, taxes, indulgencies, horses, mules, guards,
pleasures, they would lose, and in their place vigils, prayers, fastings,
tears, sermons, study and a thousand other painful toils of the same
sort." Observe Folly's reference to the retainers of the church
and then to the bishops. She says:
"That this whole swarm (that is to say, the retainers) which now
burdens— I beg your pardon— honors the Roman See, would be
driven to starvation but for me. This would be an inhuman and
abominable deed, but still more execrable would it be that those
chief princes of the church and true lights of the world should be
reduced to scrip and staff. As it is now, if there is any work to be
done, it is left to Peter and Paul, who have plenty of leisure for it—
but if there is anything of show or pleasure, they keep that for them
selves. And it so happens that, through my assistance, there is scarce
any class of men who live more jovially and are less burdened with
care. They think they are fulfilling the rule of Christ if they play the
part of bishops with mystical and almost theatrical decorations, cere
monies, titles of benediction, of reverence, of sanctity with blessings
and cursings."
From the beginning of his career to the end Erasmus de
tested war. In his opinion it was the greatest of human
follies. He followed Cicero, in declaring that a bad peace
is better than a good war. Of course Folly, in praising her
self, does not omit the benefactions she confers on man
kind by war.
Bear in mind that this work was given to the world dur
ing the reign of Julius II, the warrior pope. I quote here
from Emerton:
"An opportunity for Erasmus to express his usual detestation of
war is furnished by his references to the papal warfare, which seems
to him the most unjustifiable of all forms of military action. Indeed
one may fairly say that in this year 1509 Erasmus had clearly in
mind and had already given expression to the views which were to
13

SDCSt&ei'tUiJ *°rm the ground work of the Reformation. This was the year before
fll^rcrrfmtia: Luther's journey to Rome, and Erasmus himself was just fresh from
VlLraSmuS ijrie impressions of an Italian residence. The worldly lives of clergy
men, from pope to friar, the burden of monastic vows, the ignorance
of theologians and their scholastic backers, the follies of superstition,
of saint worship, the wickedness of indulgences, the cruel weight of
ceremonies which had no support in any worthy authority — all these
things Were as boldly pointed out by Erasmus in 1509 as they were
ever to be shown by any reformer of a later day. The Praise of Folly
carried his proclamation into a thousand hands that would never
have touched the sober, but not more serious, criticism of less
broadly human critics."
As a literary success, the Praise of Folly was, at that
time, without a rival in literary history. No less than forty-
three editions were published in the author's lifetime.
Since then the translations and publications have con
tinued down to our own time. In 1511 Erasmus published
Copia Verborum, a book on rhetoric for advanced Latin
students. It ran through more than fifty editions in the
author's lifetime, and has been often reprinted since.
Erasmus remained in England from 1509 to 1514, living
part of the time with Sir Thomas More. His letters de
scribing the More household and ways of life are most
interesting. For a time he was at Cambridge giving lec
tures. In 1511 he writes Colet, "I have finished the colla
tion of the New Testament." It is probable that most of
the work on the New Testament was done in England.
The warrior pope, Julius II, died in 1513. Shortly there
after a play was put upon the stage in Paris, entitled
Julius Exclusus. Its performance was suppressed by the
authorities. This did not, however, prevent its being
printed and widely read. It was anonymous, but its sar
casm was so scorching, its style so good, and its Latin so
superior that all the literary world immediately ascribed
it to Erasmus. It was agreed that there was no other man
in Europe who could have written it. People said its au
thor was either the devil or Erasmus. Erasmus' denial of
authorship is not very positive. He merely said that he
never published anything except over his own name. Sir
14

Thomas More in an elaborate defense of his friend, writ- SDEStDettuei
ten to a cleric who accused Erasmus of heresy, seems to" dgtagjltttft
admit that Erasmus was probably the author of Julius.
Late researches seem to leave no doubt that Erasmus was
the author. Of all the bitter lampoons upon a dead pope
or king, Julius Exclusus is entitled to first place. The
spirit of Julius appears at the gate of heaven, followed by
the spirits of his warriors, and commands it to be opened.
Peter appears and wants to know who it is and what he
wants, to which Julius commands:
"Open the gate. Don't you see this key and the triple crown and
the pallium?"
Peter replies:
"I see a key, but not the key which Christ gave to me a long time
since. The crown? I don't recognize the crown. No heathen king ever
wore such a thing, certainly none who expected to be let in here.
The pallium is strange, too. Let me look at you a little closer. Hum I
Signs of impiety in plenty, and none of the other things. Who are
these fellows behind you? Faugh! They smell of stews, drink shops
and gunpowder. Have you brought goblins out of Tartarus to make
war with heaven? Yourself, too, are not precisely like an apostle.
Priest's cassock and bloody armor below it, eyes savage, mouth inso
lent, forehead brazen, body scarred with sins all over, breath loaded
with wine, health broken with debauchery."
Peter then, by questions, makes Julius tell the crimes of
his life, how he attained the papacy, the cruel and unjust
wars he had waged, all interspersed by sarcastic com
ments by Peter.
It is said this dialogue between Peter and Julius attained
as extensive circulation as the Praise of Folly, which
means that it was read by all the reading part of Europe.
Erasmus left England in 1514, and never again crossed
the channel, though he kept up correspondence with his
friends there, and especially with Sir Thomas More, his
most intimate friend. Always in after life he retained and
expressed the strongest admiration for England and his
English friends. From them a large part of his income was
derived. From England he went to Basel with the manu- 15

%Dt$iHttiu& script of his New Testament, and there it was printed
(Erasfntus; by Froben. Froben, one of the world's most celebrated
printers, and Erasmus became close friends. On Froben's
death his son took his place as friend and publisher. This
edition of the New Testament contained the Greek text
and in a parallel column the translation into Latin, supple
mented with numerous notes. The new Pope Leo X ap
proved the work and accepted the dedication of it to
himself. Froude, in his usual picturesque manner, says
the effect of this publication was a spiritual earthquake,
that the notes made the hair of the orthodox stand on end.
I will give you one or two notes that justify Froude's
statement of its effect. After the text of Matthew xxiii,
verse 27, where Christ accuses the Scribes and Pharisees of
being whited sepulchres, the note says:
"What would Jerome say could he see the Virgin's milk exhibited
for money with as much honor paid to it as to the consecrated body
of Christ; the miraculous oil; the portions of the true cross, enough
to freight a large ship? Here we have the blood of St. Francis, there
Our Lady's petticoat or St. Anne's comb, or St. Thomas of Canter
bury's shoes; not presented as innocent aids to religion, but as the
substance of religion itself — and all through the avarice of priests
and the hypocrisy of monks playing on the credulity of the people.
Even bishops play their parts in these fantastic shows, and approve
and dwell on them in their rescripts."
Matthew xxiv:23, on "Lo, here is Christ," Erasmus says:
"I saw with my own eyes Pope Julius II at Bologna and afterwards
at Rome marching at the head of a triumphal procession as if he were
Caesar or Pompey. St. Peter subdued the world with faith, not with
arms or soldiers or military engines. St. Peter's successors would win
as many victories as St. Peter won if they had St. Peter's spirit."
This New Testament went over Europe like wild fire.
One hundred thousand copies were sold in France alone.
That would be equivalent in these days to millions of
copies being sold in one country. Edition after edition
were called for as fast as printers could turn them out,
Erasmus to the end of his life adding constantly notes
and corrections. The first publication was in 1514. In No-
16

vember, 1517, something over three years later, Luther SDcsiDcrittfi
began his crusade by posting his theses at Wittenberg.* fltratftttttfli
Strange to say, Emerton only makes a brief one-page
reference to this world-moving book, while to the Copia
Verborum, a school book, he gives six pages. But as he
too often does he gets in a dig by saying that
"recent scholarship has shown that he not only used very defective
manuscripts of no great antiquity, but he failed to make adequate
use of the best one at his disposal."
If Erasmus only had defective manuscripts he made
most effective use of them, for he anticipated modern
biblical scholars in important particulars: for example,
he was the first to reject as an interpolation the three
witnesses' verse in John's Epistle, viz.: "For there are
three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word
and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one."**
In order to help the common people to understand the
Scriptures, he prepared a paraphrase of the New Testa
ment, which was translated into all the European lan
guages. The English translation was ordered to be read
in all the churches.
In 1516 Erasmus took up his residence at Louvain and
remained there for a few years, at first enjoying the fel
lowship of the professors at the University, but later
made uncomfortable by the hostility of some of them
because of his heretical tendencies. While in Louvain,
Charles V appointed him a Councillor of State. He there
upon produced as remarkable, novel and heretical a docu
ment on government as then understood and practised as
*It is a fact which Protestants have did to bring on revolution instead of
lost sight of that the popularity reform will be briefly noted further on.
throughout all Europe of Erasmus' **Mark Pattison in his Cyclopedia
writings, before Luther was heard of, Britannica article says of the Greek
is proof that Christendom was perme- Testament, that its influence upon
ated with religious unrest. Germany opinion was profound and durable;
and France were specially affected and it contributed more to the liberation of
when Luther came to the front he only the human mind from the thralldom
voiced the feeling of a large part and of the clergy than all the uproar and
the best part of the people. What his rage of Luther's many pamphlets.
violence and his theological dogmas 17

2E>0B>tU0tttlflf he had produced on the church. As councillor he drew up
CraslttuS and presented to the young monarch an address giving
advice as to the proper duties of a king. Shortly after its
delivery it was printed and, like everything else of his,
widely circulated. Never was sounder advice given to
king or Parliament or Congress. As usual he was hun
dreds of years in advance of his time.
It was a novel doctrine in that age that the king was
the servant of the people, and occupied his place for their
good and not for his own glory. Erasmus asserted that the
highest success came from the observance of moral laws,
that no taxes should be levied that were not absolutely
necessary for the good of the commonwealth, and when
taxes were levied they should not, as was the custom, be
levied on the necessities of life, but so far as possible on
luxuries. Taxes should be imposed on those best able to
bear them, viz.: the rich; the poor should not be made
more miserable by the king's taxes. He said:
"It may be a good thing to summon the rich to frugality, but to
compel the poor to hunger and the gallows is not merely inhuman,
but dangerous as well."
The concluding chapter is devoted to the folly and
wickedness of war. Finally he asserts that where disputes
arise between princes, that instead of plunging their peo
ples into the horrors of war, they should resort to arbi
tration. On this feature of the address Emerton says:
"Here is international arbitration, pure and simple, and so far as I
know not to be found in any modern writer before Erasmus; a dream
as yet in his time and long to remain so, but, in the vast ebb and
flow of human affairs, coming ever nearer to some definite realiza
tion." The world was not ready for Erasmus' theory that gov
ernment was for the good of the people and that arbitra
tion between nations should be resorted to instead of war.
In 1521 Erasmus left Louvain and took up his residence
in Basel. He probably left Louvain because he feared
Charles V would require him to write against Luther.
18

In 1523 he published his first edition of the Colloquies. 2DE0iuECtuS
It was intended for the use of students of Latin, but so QgrjjftttttfJ
enriched by his notes that it became immensely popular.
One bookseller sold an edition of 24,000 in one year.
Another printer in Paris, having heard, or perhaps only
pretending that he had heard, that the Sorbonne was
about to prohibit the sale of the Colloquies, got out an
edition of 24,000 copies. Observe that Luther began his
career in 1517, that the Diet of Worms was in 1521, and
that Erasmus, though much abused by the followers of
Luther, yet gave out this work in 1523 and 1524. It
literally made Rome howl. The rage was not of the wise
and good men of the church, but of the great mass of the
priests and monks.
Erasmus had the protection of the pope and also of his
monarch, Charles V, and of Francis I of France, and the
support of the intelligent portion of Europe, and was able
to bid defiance to his enemies. If he had lived thirty years
more, he would undoubtedly have been burned for his
opinions. The Colloquies was the last of the Erasmus great
books, though he continued to write, to edit, to publish
with ceaseless industry till his death in 1536. He con
tinually put out new editions of his works, with added
notes, but without retracting any of his criticisms of the
clergy or the superstitions of the church.
We must now, and as briefly as possible, consider Eras
mus' relations to the Reformation as it is called. I think
that Protestant students of history are coming to an
agreement that it was not really a reformation, but a
revolution. It was a root and branch rebellion against
the church of Rome, carried to a successful issue in Nor
thern Europe and England. Erasmus, in 1521, when
Luther appeared before the Diet of Worms, was fifty-five
years of age, but in fact much older than his years indi
cated, weak in body and in the grasp of a painful disease
which in that age was incurable. His life had been de-
19

BD££tDtj;ttt0 voted to two objects; first, to advance learning. He main-
dfrafitttuS tained that human progress must come and could only
come from knowledge. Second, the reformation of the
religion of his day. He would apply reason, sound learn
ing and common sense to theological discussion. He had
made bitter war on the priests and monks for their im
morality, and their encouragement of superstition. He
had made war on the theologians and philosophers of his
time for their unnecessary and unreasonable dogmas and
hair-splitting theories. Many will no doubt think that
still greater value should be given to his bringing home
so clearly to men's minds that a church intermediary be
tween man and his Maker is not necessary to his salva
tion. It was the advocacy of this principle that in part
gave Luther his hold upon mankind. This constitutes, in
my opinion, Luther's only contribution to human prog
ress. But Luther first, and then Calvin, made the dogmas
of foreordination, predestination and election basic stones
of their theological systems. Erasmus contended that
Christ meant what he said when he declared that man's
service to his fellowmen was the test of his right to enter
the kingdom, and that his theological beliefs cut no
figure. The eagerness with which all that Erasmus published
was read shows that he was talking to a sympathetic
audience. The better class of the clergy were his friends,
likewise Popes Leo, Adrian, Clement and Paul. His young
King Charles V was friendly to him and protected him
when his clerical enemies sought to deliver him to the
inquisition. Francis I wrote to him with his own hand a
letter, asking him to come to Paris. Likewise, Henry
VIII begged him to come to England. These three young
kings were in sympathy with his desire to reform the
church, and after Julius the successive popes of his life
time were not hostile, but all four believed that there
should be reforms. The time was ripe for reform, but
not for overturning the church.
20

When Luther, and after him Calvin, not only attacked HDfStOftius!
the church as the whore of Babylon, but promulgated pre- QEtggtixug
destination and election as the basic principles of their
theology, the moderate reformers were aghast and re
fused their support. A great Catholic reaction set in.
Within the church itself there was a very considerable
reformation. Erasmus at first sympathized with Luther.
Naturally he would, for he himself for many years had
been making war on indulgences, saint worship and other
superstitions of the church, the immorality of the clergy,
and preaching the necessity of a pure life to reach Heaven.
They had some friendly correspondence, Luther begging
Erasmus to come out on his side, and if he could not do
that, not to attack him; Erasmus urging Luther to be
more moderate, to refrain from violence. Erasmus wrote
to Luther:
"Generally I think courtesy to opponents is more effective than
violence. * * * Old institutions cannot be rooted up in an in
stant. Quick argument may do more than wholesale condemnation.
Avoid all appearance of sedition. Keep cool. Do not get angry. Do not
hate anybody. Do not be excited over the noise you have made."
Meanwhile the adherents of the church were clamoring
for Erasmus to come out and demolish Luther. Both sides
thought and said that Erasmus laid the egg that Luther
hatched. Erasmus replied: "Yes, I laid an hen's egg, but
Luther hatched a crow's," and he refused to come out for
Luther. Luther's doctrine of predestination was so hate
ful to him that he yielded to his church friends to the
extent of publishing a little treatise combatting the doc
trine, but further he would not go. The gist of Erasmus'
argument against Luther's doctrine of election seems to
be that it is impossible to believe that God could deliber
ately or at all create human beings and destine them to
eternal torments without fault of their own.
This untheological but common-sense view of the mat
ter excited the ire of Luther to an extraordinary degree.
Luther admitted that here was the root of the discussion 21

SDCfitDet'tuS but denounced Erasmus for questioning the decrees of
(taSntujg God. "See him," he said, "crawling like a viper to ensnare
simple souls, after the manner of the serpent of old,
which whispered in the ear of Mother Eve, and made her
doubt the precepts of God."
During an illness, in writing to his son John he said,
"If ever I get well and strong again I will fully and pub
licly assert my God against Erasmus. I will not sell my
dear Jesus. I am daily approaching the grave — nearer and
nearer— and I am anxious, therefore, to lose no time in
once more and emphatically asserting my God in the
face of all against this bad man. Hitherto I have hesi
tated. I said to myself 'if you kill him, what will happen?'
I killed Munzer and his death at times weighs upon me,
but I killed him because he sought to kill my Christ."
Afterwards he said in a sermon, "I pray you all to
vow enmity to Erasmus." Again to two friends he said,
"I recommend it to you as my last will to be terrible and
unflinching to that serpent." In a letter to a friend he
said, "Christ will judge this atheist, this Lucian, this
Epicurus." Luther retained this animosity to the end of his life.
The larger, more humane and modern view that Eras
mus entertained towards Lutherans is seen in his earnest
endeavor to prevent their persecution.
The Pope Adrian wrote to him for advice regarding
Luther. In reply Erasmus most strongly urged toleration;
on no account to persecute Luther or his followers.
So far as my reading goes, he was not only the first to
suggest arbitration for the settlement of international
disputes, the first to propound the correct system of taxa
tion, the first to proclaim the follies and wickedness of the
generality of kings, the first to question belief in dogma
as necessary to salvation, the first to insist that we should
apply reason and common sense to religion, but the first
to maintain there should be no persecution for heresy.
Sir Thomas More in his Utopia had described a toler-
22

ant state church, and no doubt the two friends had agreed "EDt&iHttiuS
on the subject of religious toleration, but More became flgtagmutf
intolerant, while Erasmus steadily maintained his opin
ion. He even went so far as to say that Arius must have
been a good and wise man and should not have been de
clared a heretic. Contrast this spirit of Erasmus with that
of Calvin, and especially of the latter's treatment of
Servetus. The great artist Durer became a warm personal friend
of Erasmus, and left to posterity a portrait of him. Com
menting on his personal appearance, he said: "With that
sharp nose he hunted down everything but heresy."
His plea for the Bohemian Brethren is a striking instance
of his tolerant spirit.
Most of the remaining years of his life were spent in the
Protestant city of Basel. The pope tried to get him to
come to Rome, holding out the temptation of a cardinal's
hat. In 1535, the year before his death, he wrote the pope
a polite acknowledgment, but said: "I desire only to go
home and find favor with Christ."
While at Basel he was so disgusted with outrages perpe
trated on the Catholic churches by Protestants that he
left the city for a time and took up his residence in Frei
burg, a Catholic city, free at the time from the religious
dissensions so distasteful to him, but after a time re
turned to Basel, where he was esteemed by the people
of both parties, though he would not join either, as their
most distinguished citizen.
Both Catholics and Protestants have assailed his mem
ory because he would not come out and help in their bitter
contest. Even his last biographer Emerton, of Harvard,
maintains that he should have stood up and been counted
on one side or the other. To me this is most unreasonable.
Consider his age, his infirmities, the settled beliefs to which
he had devoted his life, the violence of the contending
forces and his utter disbelief in the contentions of both
sides, his assured belief, often expressed, that learning and
23

DEStOtriuS true religion would be crushed in the conflict. As an hon-
CtafittTUBf est man, he could not take sides. As an infirm old man,
it was quiet he wanted, not war and bloodshed. With the
keenness of perception with which he was endowed, he
knew that church reform could only come by evolution,
that rebellion would bring on a conflict in which the mass
of the people would resent attacks on their religion. He
saw clearly the religious wars that were bound to come.
They did come and for two hundred years large parts of
Europe were devastated by cruel and relentless war, and
the learning which Erasmus was so eager to acquire and
to bestow was nearly drowned in blood.
In 1536, his seventieth year, completely worn out by
long illness and unceasing labor, he died. There is no
record of a priest or of a minister being called to visit
him in his illness or to administer the last rites of the
church. If there had been such a visit, it would certainly
have been noted by friends who wrote of his death. He
died as he had lived, believing that the gates of Paradise
are open to him who has served his fellowman.

24

/ale I