Abstract
At the time when Erasmus’ reform programme, which we have considered in connection with the Dialogus bilinguium ac trilinguium, was bringing him into conflict with the monks and theologians, the situation was made much more difficult for him by the appearance of Martin Luther on the stage of Christendom. The reform movement led by the friar of Wittenberg was to bring about a crisis in the life of Erasmus, as in that of the Catholic Church — a crisis scarcely more welcome to the one than to the other. The relation of Erasmus to Luther has been much discussed 1). For long an enigma, because of the apparent impossibility of understanding a middle-course policy in the absorbing struggle of the sixteenth century, his conduct has at last found adequate interpretation by modern scholars 2). The problem was rendered more difficult by the efforts of Erasmus himself to cover up the traces of his activity during the critical years before Worms. The three Reformation tracts, the Acta, the Axiomata and the Consilium cuiusdam, are therefore of great value as aids in determining his actual policy at that time.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Literatur
Aside from the biographies of Erasmus and the general histories of the period, see A. Meyer: Étude critique sur les relations d’Érasme et de Luther, 1909; E. König: „Erasmus und Luther,” in Historisches Jahrbuch, XLI, 1921, pp. 52–75; P. Kalkoff: Erasmus, Luther und Friedrich der Weise, 1919; Die Vermittlungspolitik des Erasmus und sein Anteil an den Flugschriften der ersten Reformationszeit, 1903; M. Richter: Die Stellung des Erasmus zu Luther, 1900.
See especially Smith, pp. 209–56; A. Humbert: Les Origines de la Théologie Moderne, 1911.
Cf. Ep. 1127, 18–20.
Cf. Luther to John Lang, 1 March 1517, P. Smith: Luther’s Correspondence, 1913–18, Ep. 30.
For discussion of the fundamental disagreement of the sixteenth century disciples of Jerome and Augustine, see Humbert, pp. 224–66; HV Introd.
Smith, p. 211.
Cf. Ep. 1144, 2–3, to Chieregato, 13 Sept. 1520: „Fortasse paucis aeque dolet hic Lutheri tumultus ac mihi; quem vtinam aut initio potuissem excludere aut nunc componere !”
Cf. Ep. 1039.
Cf. Epp. 785, 37; Luthers Brie f wechsel, ed. E. L. Enders and G. Kawerau, 1884–1915, Ep. 92; Kalkoff: Erasmus, p. 24 ff; Smith, p. 216.
Epp. 872, 12–25; 877, 10.
Humbert, p. 247 ff; Luther disapproved of Erasmus’ levity and had also, as early as 1516, protested against his interpretation of the Pauline doctrine of faith. See Enders, I, 63 f; cf. Smith, p. 214 f.
Ep. 910.
Ep. 933.
Kalkoff: Erasmus, p. 33 ff.
Ep. 938.
Ep. 939; cf. Ax. Introd.
Ep. 980; cf. Kalkoff: Erasmus, p. 48 ff; Meyer, p. 27.
Ep. 1033; cf. Kalkoff: Erasmus, pp. 66–83, for full discussion of this second „manifesto” ; but see Ep. 1152.
Epp. 967; 961; 1062; etc.
Smith, p. 219.
Cf. Ep. 1161, 14–18.
Cf. Epp. 961, 25–33; 967, 135–44; 1225, 106–9.
Cf. P. Kalkoff: Die Anfänge der Gegenreformation in den Niederlanden, 1903, p. 61 ff; CND Introd.
Ep. 967, 69–70; cf. Epp. 1143, 8–11; 1204, 12–14.
Cf. Ep. 967, 92–3.
Ep. 1007.
Cf. Epp. 1040, 2–5; 1157, 9–12; 1167, 268–78.
Epp. 939, 66–99; 947, 34; 967, 78; 993, 44–47; 1033, 38–40; 1143, 13–14; 1164, 63–4.
Cf. Epp. 1040, 2–4; 1153, 101–17; 1162, 174–6.
See Crotus Rubeanus to Luther, 5 Dec. 1520, Enders, III, 8 f; cf. Kalkoff: Anfänge, I, 74; and in Zeitschrif t für Kirchengeschichte, XXXI, 1910, pp. 48–65.
Cf. AQR 1206 n; CND Introd.
Cf. Epp. 1113; 1119, 26–41; Spongia aduersus aspergines Hutteni. LB, X, 1659, A.
Epp. 1125; 1143; 1144; 1149–52; 1156–8.
Cf. Kalkoff: Vermittlungspolitik, p. 58 ff; and „Erasmus und seine Schüler W. Nesen und Nicolaus von Herzogenbusch im Kampfe mit den Löwener Theologen,” in Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke, ed. E. Egli and G. Finsler, 1905 seqq., VII, 402–20.
Cf. Kalkoff: Vermittlungspolitik, p. 25; Aleander gegen Luther, 1908, p. 38 ; Ep. 1 155 Introd.
H. de Jongh: L’Ancienne Faculté de Théologie de Louvain, 1911, p. 228 ff.
See V. L. von Seckendorf: Commentarius historicus et apologeticus de Lutheranismo, 1692, I, 125.
Cratander to Vadian, 8 March 1521, Die Vadianische Brief sammlung der Stadtbibliothek St. Gallen, ed. E. Arbenz and H. Wartmann, 1890–1908, Ep. 247.
Pp. 23–58. The parallel passages cited by Kalkoff have been used in the notes without further acknowledgment.
Smith, p. 231; Meyer, p. 48. It had already been ascribed to Erasmus by M. Schuler and J. Schulthess in Zwinglii Opera, 1832, III, 2, but without proof. Allen concludes that Ep. 1153 must at least have been in the hands of the author of the Acta. Cf. AAL 25–43.
De Jongh, p. 240 f; cf. M. Luther: Opera latina varii argumenti, ed. H. Schmidt, 1865, IV, 308. See CND Introd.
Enders, Epp. 290; 291; cf. Smith: Luther’s Correspondence, Epp. 241; 242.
Cf. Kalkoff: Vermittlungspolitik, p. 23 f.
Cf. Kalkoff: Vermittlungspolitik, pp. 59; 69.
Reprinted, ibid. p. 82 f.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1933 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ferguson, W.K. (1933). Acta Academiae Lovaniensis Contra Lvthervm. In: Erasmi Opuscula. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6218-2_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6218-2_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-5795-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-6218-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive