CHAP. 'Theology,' told Spalatin that this illustrious man 'seemed to have touched upon many points in the same A.D. 1519. strain as Luther, for in these things,' he said, 'they Erasmus's opinion of Melanch thon. What he says 'agreed;' adding, that Erasmus was freer than Luther, 'because he had the assistance of real and sacred learning;' and he mentioned this as an illustration of what he had just been saying, 'that every good man thought 'well of their cause.'1 Erasmus, on his side, also spoke in the highest possible terms of Melanchthon. He had great hopes from his youth that he might long survive himself, and if he did, he predicted that his name would throw that of Erasmus into the shade.2 Whilst, however, Erasmus thus freely acknowledged the friendship and merits of Melanchthon, he was careful not to commit himself to an approval of all that Luther was doing. And surely it was wise; for that his strong Augustinian tendencies were well known to the Oxford Reformers, has already been seen in More's letter to the anonymous monk. On April 2, 1519, in reply to a letter from Melanchof Luther thon3 mentioning Luther's desire of his approval, lanchthon. Erasmus wrote, that 'while every one of his friends 'honoured Luther's private life, as to his doctrine there to Me 6 6 were different opinions. He himself had not read Luther's books. Luther had censured some things deservedly, but he wished that he had done so as happily as he had freely.' At the end of this letter he expressed his affectionate anxiety lest Melanchthon should be wearing himself out by too hard study. 75. 1 March 1519, Bretschneider, i. p. | 3 Dated January 5, from Wittem berg. Bretschneider, i. p. 59. CHAP. XVI. writes to On March 28, Luther had written a letter to Erasmus, which probably crossed this on the way between Wittemberg and Louvain. It was a letter in which he A.D. 1519. had not made the slightest allusion to any difference of Luther opinion between himself and Erasmus. On the con- Erasmus. trary, he had spoken as though he held Erasmus in the greatest possible honour. He had spoken of his having a place, and 'reigning' in the hearts of all who really loved literature. He had been reading the new preface to the 'Enchiridion,' and from it and from his friend Fabricius Capito he had learned that Erasmus had not only heard but approved of what he had done respecting indulgences. And with much genuine humility he had begged Erasmus to acknowledge him, however ignorant and unknown to fame, buried as it were in his cell, as a brother in Christ, by whom he himself was held in the greatest affection and regard.1 To this Erasmus, on May 30, replied, in a letter in which he did address Luther as a brother in Christ.' He said he had not yet read the books which had created so much clamour, and therefore could not judge of them. He had looked into his Commentaries on the Psalms, was much pleased with them, and hoped they would prove useful. Some of the best men in England, even some at Louvain, thought well of him and his writings. As to himself, he devoted himself, as he had done all along, to the revival of good literature [including first and foremost the Scriptures]. And it seemed to him, he said, that more good would come of courteous modesty than of impetuosity. It was by this that Christ drew the world under his influence. It was thus that 1 Luther's Briefe. De Wette, vol i. Epist. cxxx. p. 249. Erasmus Luther. replies to CHAP. Paul abrogated that Judaical law, treating it all as typical. It were better to exclaim against abuses of A.D. 1519. pontifical authority than against the Popes themselves. May the Lord Jesus daily impart to you abundantly (he concluded) of his own Spirit to his own glory and 'the public good.' 1 What says about others. Thus he seems to have said the same things to both Melanchthon and Luther. In the same strain, also, he wrote to others about them. To the exasperated monks, who charged him with aiding and abetting Luther in writing the books which had caused such a tumult, he replied that, as he had not read them, he could not even express a decided opinion upon them.2 To Cardinal Wolsey he wrote, that he had only read a few pages of Luther's books, not because he disliked them, but because he was so closely occupied with his own. Luther's life was such that even his enemies could not find anything to slander. Germany had young men of learning and eloquence who would, he foretold, bring her great glory. Eobanus, Hutten, and Beatus Rhenanus were the only ones he knew personally. If these German students were too free in their criticisms, it should be remembered to what constant exasperation they had been submitted in all manner of ways, both public and private.3 To Hutten, who was perhaps the most hot-headed of these German young men, and whose satire had already proved itself more trenchant and bitter than any in which Erasmus had ever indulged, he urged modera 1 Louvain, May 30, 1519. Eras. Epist. ccccxxvii. 2 Eras. Op. iii. p. 444, E and F. 3 Epist. cccxvii. May 18, 1519. tion, and said that for himself he had rather spend a month in trying to explain St. Paul or the Gospels than waste a day in quarrelling.1 Erasmus was, in fact, working hard at his 'Para' phrases.' That on the Epistle to the Romans had been already printed in 1517, in the very best type of Thierry Martins, and forming a small and very readable octavo volume. Those on the next seven epistles2 now followed in quick succession in the spring of 1519. How fully the heart of Erasmus was in his work is incidentally shown by the fact that, being obliged to write a pamphlet in defence of a former publication of his, he cut it short by saying that he had rather be working at the Paraphrase on the 'Galatians,' which he was just completing. And Erasmus was preparing, in addition to these Paraphrases on the Epistles, others, at Colet's desire, more lengthy, on the Gospels. Here was work enough surely on hand to excuse him from entering into the Lutheran controversy-work precisely of that kind, moreover, which he had told Luther that he was devoting himself to. It was the work which, when he was longing for rest, and his zeal for the moment was threatening to flag, Colet had urged him to go on with through good and evil fortune; and which he himself, in his letter to Servatius, had said he was determined to work at to the day of his death. It is clear that he was in earnest when he told Hutten that he had rather spend a month in expounding St. Paul than waste a day in quarrelling.' It seems to me, therefore, that the attitude of 1 Epist. ccccxiii. Ap. 23, 1519. 2 Eras. Epist. Laurentio: Louvain, Feb. 1519, prefixed to the Basle edition of the Five Epistles, 1520. 3 Apologia pro Declamatione de CHAP. A.D. 1519. Erasmus is writing his 'Paraphrases.' CHAP. A.D. 1519. Erasmus towards Luther was that, not of a coward, but of a man who knew what he was about. VI. ELECTION OF CHARLES V. TO THE EMPIRE (1519). On January 12, 1519, Maximilian had died. It is not within the scope of this history to trace the steps and countersteps, the plots and counterplots, the bribery and treachery-the Machiavellian means and devices-in which nearly every sovereign in Europe was implicated, to the detriment of both conscience and exchequer, and which ended in placing Charles V., Election of then absent in Spain, at the head of the German Charles V. empire. With the accession of the new emperor com menced a new political era, which belongs to the history of the Protestant Reformation, and not to that of the Oxford Reformers. Erasmus was too hard at work at his Paraphrases to admit of his meddling in politics, even though he himself had an honorary connection with the court of the prince who was the successful candidate, and had written his Christian Prince' expressly for his benefit. Colet was living in retirement, suffering from shattered health, too closely watched by the restless eye of his bishop to take any part in public affairs.1 Even More, though now a constant attendant upon Henry VIII., was probably not initiated into continental secrets, and even had he shared all the counsels of Wolsey, any part which he might play would be purely executive, and belong rather to the history of 1 Colet seems even to have retired from the office of preacher before the King on Good Friday, which he had filled in 1510, 1511, 1512, 1513, 1515, 1516, and 1517. Brewer, ii. pp. 1445-1474. In 1518 the sermon was preached by the Dean of Sarum, p. 1477. |