Biographers, such as
Johan Huizinga, frequently draw connections between many of Erasmus's convictions and his early biography: esteem for the married state and appropriate marriages, support for priestly marriage, concern for improving marriage prospects for women, opposition to inconsiderate rules (notably, institutional dietary rules), a desire to make education engaging for the participants, interest in classical languages, horror of poverty and spiritual hopelessness, distaste for friars begging when they could study or work, unwillingness to be under the direct control of authorities, laicism, the need for those in authority to act in the best interest of their charges, a prizing of mercy and peace, an anger over unnecessary war, especially between avaricious princes, an awareness of mortality, the wisdom of avoiding danger, etc.
Manner of thinking Erasmus had a distinctive manner of thinking, a Catholic historian suggests: one that is capacious in its perception, agile in its judgements, and unsettling in its irony with "a deep and abiding commitment to human flourishing". "In all spheres, his outlook was essentially pastoral." He was an "incurable idealist". Erasmus has been called a seminal rather than a consistent or systematic thinker, notably averse to over-extending from the specific to the general, who nevertheless should be taken very seriously as a
pastoral and rhetorical theologian, with a philological and historical approach—rather than a metaphysical approach—to interpreting Scripture and interested in the
literal and tropological senses. A theologian has written of "Erasmus' preparedness completely to satisfy no-one but himself". He has been called moderate, judicious and constructive even when being critical or when mocking extremes; but thin-skinned against slanders of heterodoxy.
Manner of expression Irony Erasmus often wrote in a highly ironical idiom, • Erasmus's aphoristic quote on the persecution of Reuchlin, "If it is Christian to hate Jews, we are all abundantly Christians here", is taken literally by Theodor Dunkelgrün and Harry S. May as being approving of such hatred; the alternative view would be that it was sardonic and challenging. He frequently wrote about controversial subjects using the
dialogue to avoid direct statements clearly attributable to himself. For Martin Luther, he was an eel, slippery, evasive and impossible to capture.
Copiousness Erasmus's literary theory of "copiousness" endorses a large stockpile of rich
adages,
analogies,
tropes and symbolic figures, which leads to compressed communication of complex ideas (between those educated in the stockpile) but some of which, to modern sensibilities, may promote, rather than play off,
stereotypes. • Erasmus's lengthy collections of proverbs, the , established a vocabulary he and his contemporaries then used extensively and habitually: according to philosopher Heinz Kimmerle, it is necessary to know the explanations of various proverbs given by Erasmus's to adequately understand many passages in Erasmus's and Luther's written debate on free will (see below). • When Erasmus wrote of 'Judaism', he most frequently (though not always) was not referring to Jews: instead he referred to those Catholic Christians of his time, especially in the monastic lifestyle, who mistakenly promoted excessive external ritualism over interior piety, by analogy with
Second Temple Judaism. • "Judaism I call not Jewish impiety, but prescriptions about external things, such as food, fasting, clothes, which to a certain degree resemble the rituals of the Jews." • Erasmus's counter-accusation to Spanish friars of "Judaizing" may have been particularly sharp and bold, given the prominent role that some friars with the
Spanish Inquisition were playing in the lethal persecution of some
conversos. Terence J. Martin identifies an "Erasmian pattern" that the supposed (by the reader) otherness (of Turks, Lapplanders, Indians, Amerindians, Jews, and even women and heretics) "provides a
foil against which the failures of Christian culture can be exposed and criticized." • In a 1518 letter to
John Fisher, Erasmus wrote: "The cunning of princes and the effrontery of the Roman curia can go no further; and it looks as though the state of the common people would soon be such that the tyranny of the Grand Turk would be more bearable."
Pacifism Peace, peaceableness, and peacemaking, in all spheres from the domestic to the religious to the political, were central distinctives of Erasmus's writing on Christian living and his mystical theology: "the sum and summary of our religion is peace and unanimity" At the
Nativity of Jesus "the angels sang not the glories of war, nor a song of triumph, but a hymn of peace": Erasmus was not an absolute
pacifist but promoted political
pacificism and religious
Irenicism. Notable writings on irenicism include ,
On the War with the Turks,
The Education of a Christian Prince,
On Restoring the Concord of the Church, and
The Complaint of Peace. Erasmus's ecclesiology of peacemaking held that the church authorities had a divine mandate to settle religious disputes, in an as non-excluding way as possible, including by the preferably-minimal
development of doctrine. It was especially important that princes be educated to be wise, because of the ease with which new rulers slip into wars for adventure or on impulse: Erasmus is direct: "What is a mistake in other people is a crime in the prince." In
The Complaint of Peace, Lady Peace insists on peace as the crux of Christian life and for understanding Christ: A historian has called him "The 16th Century's Pioneer of Peace Education and a Culture of Peace". Erasmus's emphasis on peacemaking reflects a typical pre-occupation of
medieval lay spirituality as historian John Bossy (as summarised by Eamon Duffy) puts it: "medieval Christianity had been fundamentally concerned with the creation and maintenance of peace in a violent world. 'Christianity' in medieval Europe denoted neither an ideology nor an institution, but a community of believers whose religious ideal—constantly aspired to if seldom attained—was peace and mutual love."
War Historians have written that "references to conflict run like a red thread through the writings of Erasmus". was #3,001 "War is sweet to those who have never tasted it" ( from
Pindar's Greek). He promoted and was present at the
Field of Cloth of Gold, and his wide-ranging
correspondence frequently related to issues of peacemaking. He saw a key role of the Church in peacemaking by arbitration and mediation, Appeasement should be considered. Defeat should be endured rather than fighting to the end. In his he discusses (common translation) "A disadvantageous peace is better than a just war", which owes to
Cicero and John Colet's "Better an unjust peace than the justest war." Expansionism could not be justified. Taxes to pay for war should cause the least possible hardship on the poor. He hated sedition as, often, an excuse or cause of oppression. Erasmus was highly critical of the warlike way of important European princes of his era, including some princes of the church. He described these princes as corrupt and greedy. Erasmus believed that these princes "collude in a game, of which the outcome is to exhaust and oppress the commonwealth". and other schemes to cause wars to extract money from his subjects. One of his approaches was to send and publish congratulatory and lionising letters to princes who, though in a position of strength, negotiated peace with neighbours, such as King
Sigismund I the Old of Poland in 1527. Concord demanded unity and assent: Erasmus was anti-sectarian as well as non-sectarian. To follow the law of love, our intellects must be humble and friendly when making any assertions: he called contention "earthly, beastly, demonic" Certain works of Erasmus laid a foundation for religious toleration of private opinions and
ecumenism. For example, in , opposing particular views of Martin Luther, Erasmus noted that religious disputants should be temperate in their language "because in this way the truth, which is often lost amidst too much wrangling may be more surely perceived". Gary Remer writes, "Like
Cicero, Erasmus concludes that truth is furthered by a more harmonious relationship between interlocutors." In a letter to Cardinal
Lorenzo Campeggio, Erasmus lobbied diplomatically for toleration: "If the sects could be tolerated under certain conditions (as the Bohemians pretend), it would, I admit, be a grievous misfortune, but one more endurable than war." But the same dedication to avoiding conflict and bloodshed should be shown by those tempted to join (anti-popist) sects:
Heresy and sedition Erasmus had been privately involved in early attempts to protect Luther and his sympathisers from charges of
heresy. Erasmus wrote to say that the Lutherans (of 1523) were not formally heretics: he pushed back against the willingness of some theologians to cry heresy fast in order to enforce their views in universities and at inquisitions. For Erasmus, punishable heresy had to involve fractiously, dangerously, and publicly agitating against essential doctrines relating to Christ (i.e., blasphemy), with malice, depravity, obstinacy. As with St
Theodore the Studite, Erasmus was against the death penalty merely for private or peaceable heresy or for dissent on non-essentials: "It is better to cure a sick man than to kill him." The Church, he said, has the duty to protect believers and convert or heal heretics; he invoked Jesus'
parable of the wheat and tares. Despite these concessions to state power, Erasmus suggested that religious persecution could still be challenged as inexpedient (ineffective).
Outsiders Most of his political writing focused on peace within
Christendom with almost a sole focus on Europe. In 1516, Erasmus wrote, "It is the part of a Christian prince to regard no one as an outsider unless he is a nonbeliever, and even on them he should inflict no harm", which entails not attacking outsiders, not taking their riches, not subjecting them to political rule, no forced conversions, and keeping promises made to them. Erasmus regarded the Jewish and Islamic religions as Christian heresies (and therefore competitors to orthodox Christianity) rather than separate religions, using the inclusive term
half-Christian for the latter. However, there is a wide range of scholarly opinion on the extent and nature of
antisemitic and
anti-Muslim prejudice in his writings: historian Nathan Ron has found his writing to be harsh and racial in its implications, with contempt and hostility to Islam.
Turks In his last decade, he involved himself in the
public policy debate on war with the
Ottoman Empire, which was then invading
Western Europe, notably in his book
On the war against the Turks (1530), as the "reckless and extravagant" Pope Leo X had in previous decades promoted going on the offensive with a new crusade. Erasmus reworked Luther's rhetoric that the invading Turks represent God's judgement of decadent Christendom, but without Luther's fatalism: Erasmus not only accused Western leaders of kingdom-threatening hypocrisy, he reworked a remedy already decreed by the
Fifth Council of the Lateran: anti-expansionist moral reforms by Europe's disunited leaders as a necessary unitive political step before any aggressive warfare against the Ottoman threat, reforms which might themselves, if sincere, prevent both the internecine and foreign warfare.
Jews Erasmus perceived and championed strong
Hellenistic rather than exclusively Hebraic influences on the
intellectual milieux of Jesus, Paul, and the early church: "If only the Christian church did not attach so much importance to the Old Testament!" Perhaps the only Jewish book he published was his loose translation of the first century Hellenistic-Judaic
On the Sovereignty of Reason, better known as
4 Maccabees. Erasmus's pervasive anti-ceremonialism treated the early Church debates on circumcision, food, and special days as manifestations of cultural chauvinism by the initial Jewish Christians in Antioch. While many humanists, from
Pico della Mirandola to
Johannes Reuchlin, were intrigued by Jewish mysticism, Erasmus came to dislike it: "I see them as a nation full of most tedious fabrications, who spread a kind of fog over everything, Talmud, Cabbala, Tetragrammaton, Gates of Light, words, words, words. I would rather have Christ mixed up with Scotus than with that rubbish of theirs." In his
Paraphrase on Romans, Erasmus voiced, as Paul, the "secret" that in the end times, "all of the Israelites will be restored to salvation" and accept Christ as their Messiah, "although now part of them have fallen away from it". Several scholars have identified
cases where Erasmus's comments appear to go beyond theological
anti-Judaism into slurs or approving certain
anti-semitic policies, though there is some controversy.
Slaves On the subject of slavery, Erasmus characteristically treated it in passing under the topic of tyranny: Christians were not allowed to be tyrants, which slave-owning required, but especially not to be the masters of other Christians. Erasmus had various other piecemeal arguments against slavery: for example, that it was not legitimate to enslave people taken in an unjust war; but it was not a subject that occupied him. However, his belief that "nature created all men free" (and slavery was imposed) was a rejection of Aristotle's category of natural slaves.
Politics Erasmus promoted the idea that a prince rules with the consent of his people, notably in his book
The Education of a Christian Prince (and, through More, in the book
Utopia, which proposed a "republic completely lacking sovereignty"). He may have been influenced by the
Brabantine custom of an incoming ruler being officially told of his duties and welcomed: notably for the underappreciated sacraments of Baptism and Marriage (see
On the Institution of Christian Marriage) considered as vocations more than events; and for the mysterious Eucharist, pragmatic Confession, the dangerous
Last Rites (writing
On the Preparation for Death), and the pastoral Holy Orders (see
Ecclesiastes). Historians have noted that Erasmus's commendation of the benefits of immersive, docile scripture-reading is put in sacramental terms. A test of the Reformation was the doctrine of the sacraments, and the crux of this question was the observance of the
Eucharist. Erasmus was concerned that the
sacramentarians, headed by
Œcolampadius of Basel, were claiming Erasmus held views similar to their own to try to claim him for their schismatic and "erroneous" movement. When the Mass was finally banned in Basel in 1529, Erasmus immediately abandoned the city, as did the other expelled Catholic clergy. In 1530, Erasmus published a
new edition of the orthodox treatise of
Algerus against the heretic
Berengar of Tours in the eleventh century. He added a dedication, affirming his belief in the reality of the Body of Christ after consecration in the Eucharist, commonly referred to as
transubstantiation. Erasmus seems to have suspected that the scholastic formulation of transubstantiation stretched language past its breaking point, however he noted that even if transubstantiation were not true, as some Protestants has started to claim, it should not be a cause of preventing people with traditional views from worshipping (
latria) God in the
Host, as the divinity of God is everywhere present. By and large, the miraculous real change that interested Erasmus, the author, more than that of the bread is the transformation in the humble partaker. Erasmus wrote several notable pastoral books and pamphlets on sacraments, always looking through rather than at the rituals or forms: • on marriage and wise matches, • preparation for confession and the need for pastoral encouragement by priests (whose primary duty was to shepherd, not just to consecrate/absolve), At the height of his literary fame, Erasmus was called upon to take one side, but public partisanship was foreign to his beliefs, nature, and habits. Despite all his
criticism of clerical corruption and abuses within the Western Church, especially at first he sided unambiguously with neither Luther nor the anti-Lutherans publicly (though in private he lobbied assiduously against extremism from both parties), but eventually shunned the breakaway Protestant Reformation movements along with their most
radical offshoots. Erasmus was also notable for exposing several important historical documents of theological and political importance as forgeries or misattributions: including pseudo-
Dionysius the Areopagite, the attributed to
St Augustine, the attributed to Cicero, and (by reprinting
Lorenzo Valla's work) the
Donation of Constantine.
Anti-fraternalism Reacting from his own experiences, Erasmus came to believe that monastic life and institutions no longer served the positive spiritual or social purpose they once may have: in the
Enchiridion he controversially put it "Monkishness is not piety." At this time, it was better to live as "a monk in the world" than in the monastery. Many of his works contain diatribes against supposed monastic corruption and careerism, particularly against the mendicant friars (Franciscans and Dominicans). These orders also typically ran the university's Scholastic theology programs, from whose ranks came his most dangerous enemies. The more some attacked him, the more offensive he became about what he saw as their political influence and materialistic opportunism. He was scandalised by superstitions (such as that if a person were buried in a Franciscan habit, they would go directly to heaven), crime, and child novices. He advocated various reforms, including a ban on taking orders until the 30th year; the closure of corrupt and smaller monasteries; respect for bishops; requiring work, not begging (reflecting the practice of his own order of
Augustinian Canons); the downplaying of monastic hours, fasts and ceremonies; and a less mendacious approach to gullible pilgrims and tenants. However, he was not in favour of speedy closures of monasteries, nor of closing larger reformed monasteries with important libraries: in his account of his pilgrimage to Walsingham, he noted that the funds extracted from pilgrims typically supported houses for the poor and elderly. These ideas widely influenced his generation of humanists, both Catholic and Protestant, and the lurid hyperbolic attacks in his half-satire
The Praise of Folly were later treated by Protestants as objective reports of near-universal corruption. Furthermore, "what is said over a glass of wine, ought not to be remembered and written down as a serious statement of belief", such as his proposal to marry all monks to all nuns or to send them all away to fight the Turks and colonise new islands. His main Catholic opposition was from scholars in the mendicant orders. He purported that "
Saint Francis came lately to me in a dream and thanked me for chastising them." After his lifetime, scholars of mendicant orders have sometimes disputed Erasmus as hyperbolic and ill-informed. A 20th-century
Benedictine scholar wrote of him as "all sail and no rudder". and tried to keep the reform movement focused on institutional rather than theological issues, yet he also privately wrote to authorities to prevent Luther's persecution. In the words of one historian, "at this earlier period he was more concerned with the fate of Luther than his theology." In 1520, Erasmus wrote that "Luther ought to be answered and not crushed." However, the publication of Luther's
On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church (October 1520), which largely repudiated Church teaching on sacraments, and his subsequent bellicosity drained Erasmus's and many humanists' sympathy, even more as Christians became partisans and the partisans took to violence. Luther hoped for his cooperation in a work which seemed only the natural outcome of Erasmus's own, and spoke with admiration of Erasmus's superior learning. In their early correspondence, Luther expressed boundless admiration for all Erasmus had done in the cause of a sound and reasonable Christianity and urged him to join the Lutheran party. Erasmus declined to commit himself, arguing his usual "small target" excuse, that to do so would endanger the cause of which he regarded as one of his purposes in life. Only as an independent scholar could he hope to influence the reform of religion. When Erasmus declined to support him, the "straightforward" Luther became angered that Erasmus was avoiding the responsibility due either to cowardice or a lack of purpose. However, any hesitancy on the part of Erasmus may have stemmed not from lack of courage or conviction, but rather from a concern over the mounting disorder and violence of the reform movement. To
Philip Melanchthon in 1524 he wrote: Erasmus attempted various distinctions to escape accusations of Lutheranism: for example for the claim that he emphasized faith to the exclusion of charity he wrote "[My paraphrases] do not offer even the tiniest support to the Lutheran heresy, since my propositions [faith alone suffices without merits] speak of those who are purified by baptism, whereas Luther speaks of the good works of adults after baptism." Catholic theologian George Chantraine notes that, where Luther quotes Luke 11:21 "He that is not with me is against me", Erasmus takes Mark 9:40 "For he that is not against us, is on our part." Though he sought to remain accommodative in doctrinal disputes, each side accused him of siding with the other, perhaps because of his perceived influence and what they regarded as his dissembling neutrality, which he regarded as peacemaking
accommodation: {{Blockquote|text=I detest dissension because it goes both against the teachings of Christ and against a secret inclination of nature. I doubt that either side in the dispute can be suppressed without grave loss.
Dispute on free will By 1523, and first suggested in a letter from Henry VIII, Erasmus had been convinced that Luther's ideas on necessity/free will were a subject of core disagreement deserving a public airing, and strategised with friends and correspondents on how to respond with proper moderation without making the situation worse for all, especially for the humanist reform agenda. He eventually chose a
campaign that involved an irenical 'dialogue'
The Inquisition of Faith, a positive, evangelical model sermon
On the Measureless Mercy of God, and a gently critical 'diatribe'
On Free Will. The publication of his brief book
On Free Will initiated what has been called "The greatest debate of that era", which still has ramifications today. They bypassed discussion on reforms which they both agreed on in general, and instead dealt with authority and biblical justifications of
synergism versus
monergism in relation to salvation. Luther responded with
On the Bondage of the Will () (1525). Erasmus replied to this in his lengthy two-volume
Hyperaspistes and other works, which Luther ignored. Apart from the perceived moral failings among followers of the Reformers—an important sign for Erasmus—he also dreaded any change in doctrine, citing the long history of the Church as a bulwark against innovation. He put the matter bluntly to Luther: Continuing his chastisement of Luther – and undoubtedly put off by the notion of there being "no pure interpretation of Scripture anywhere but in Wittenberg" – Erasmus touches upon another important point of the controversy:
"False evangelicals" In 1529, Erasmus wrote "An epistle against those who falsely boast they are Evangelicals" to
Gerardus Geldenhouwer (former Bishop of Utrecht, also schooled at Deventer). Here Erasmus complains of the doctrines and morals of the Reformers, applying the same critique he had made about public Scholastic disputations: {{Blockquote| Look around on this 'Evangelical' generation, and observe whether among them less indulgence is given to luxury, lust, or avarice, than among those whom you so detest. Show me any one person who by that Gospel has been reclaimed from drunkenness to sobriety, from fury and passion to meekness, from avarice to liberality, from reviling to well-speaking, from wantonness to modesty. I will show you a great many who have become worse through following it. [...] The solemn prayers of the Church are abolished, but now there are very many who never pray at all. [...] I have never entered their conventicles, but I have sometimes seen them returning from their sermons, the countenances of all of them displaying rage, and wonderful ferocity, as though they were animated by the evil spirit. [...] Who ever beheld in their meetings any one of them shedding tears, smiting his breast, or grieving for his sins? [...] Confession to the priest is abolished, but very few now confess to God. [...] They have fled from Judaism that they may become Epicureans.
Other According to historian Christopher Ocker, the early reformers "needed tools that let their theological distinctions pose as commonplaces in a textual theology; [...] Erasmus provided the tools", but this tendentious distinction-making, reminiscent of the recent excesses of Scholasticism to Erasmus's eyes, "was precisely what Erasmus disliked about Luther" and "Protestant polemicists". Erasmus wrote books against aspects of the teaching, impacts or threats of several other Reformers: •
Ulrich von Hutten: (1523) •
Martin Bucer:
Responsio ad fratres Inferioris Germaniae ad epistolam apologeticam incerto autoreproditam (1530) • :
Admonitio adversus mendacium et obstrectationem (1530) However, Erasmus maintained friendly relations with other Protestants, notably the irenic
Melanchthon and
Albrecht Dürer. A common accusation, supposedly started by antagonistic monk-theologians, made Erasmus responsible for Martin Luther and the Reformation: "Erasmus laid the egg, and Luther hatched it." Erasmus wittily dismissed the charge, claiming that Luther had "hatched a different bird entirely". Erasmus-reader
Peter Canisius commented: "Certainly there was no lack of eggs for Luther to hatch."
Philosophy Erasmus has a problematic standing in the history of philosophy: whether he should be called a philosopher at all, (as, indeed, some question whether he should be considered a theologian either or grammarian rather than a philosopher. He was particularly influenced by satirist and rhetorician
Lucian. Erasmus's writings shifted "an intellectual culture from logical disputation about things to quarrels about texts, contexts, and words".
Classical Erasmus syncretistically took phrases, ideas and motifs from many classical philosophers to furnish discussions of Christian themes: academics have identified aspects of his thought as variously
Platonist (duality),
Cynical (
asceticism),
Stoic (
adiaphora),
Epicurean (
ataraxia, pleasure as virtue), realist/non-voluntarist, and
Isocratic (rhetoric, political education, syncretism). However, his Christianized version of
Epicureanism is regarded as his own. Erasmus was sympathetic to a kind of epistemological (
Ciceronian not
Cartesian) however, historian Ross Dealy sees Erasmus's decrial of other non-gentle "perverse affections" as having Stoical roots. Erasmus also put it that the mind () should act a ruler over the body () and the spirit, which he used to provide political analogies: correct rule (by the prince=mind) produces peace in the body and the body politic.
Anti-scholasticism He usually eschewed metaphysical, epistemological and logical philosophy as found in
Aristotle: in particular the curriculum and systematic methods of the post-Aquinas Schoolmen (
Scholastics) and what he regarded as their frigid, counter-productive
Aristoteleanism: "What has Aristotle to do with Christ?" Erasmus held that academics must avoid philosophical factionalism as an offence against Christian concord, to "make the whole world Christian". "Men are drawn to Godliness by a thousand means." Indeed, Erasmus warned that Scholastic philosophy actually could distract participants from their proper focus on immediate morality, unless used moderately, and by "excluding the Platonists from their commentaries, they strangle the beauty of revelation." "They are windbags blown up with Aristotle, sausages stuffed with a mass of theoretical definitions, conclusions, and propositions."
Duns Scotus, or his uninspiring proponents, generally came off even worse than Aquinas, nevertheless, despite his biting sharp comments, Erasmus paraded that he did not reject any medieval theologians totally, merely that he was championing the return to the fresh springs. Nevertheless,
Protestant church historian has commented on a certain closeness of Erasmus's thought to
Thomas Aquinas', despite Erasmus's scepticism about runaway Aristotelianism ======== (Not to be confused with his Italian contemporary
Chrysostom Javelli's .) Erasmus approached
classical philosophers theologically and rhetorically: their value was in how they pre-saged, explained or amplified the unique teachings of Christ (particularly the Sermon on the Mount In fact, he said, Christ was "the very father of philosophy" (). His characteristic combination of a Hellenic-informed Jesus whose teaching emphasis was on inter-personal relations more than abstract spiritual truths has been criticized e.g. by a view "however, Erasmus sought only what was human in the Sermon on the Mount, just as he found what was Christian in the moral philosophy of the Stoics." In works such as his
Enchiridion,
The Education of a Christian Prince and the
Colloquies, Erasmus developed his idea of the , a life lived according to the teachings of Jesus taken as a spiritual-ethical-social-political-legal Useful "philosophy" needed to be limited to (or re-defined as) the practical and moral:
Theology Three key distinctive features of the spirituality Erasmus proposed are
accommodation, inverbation, and . In the view of literary historian Chester Chapin, Erasmus's tendency of thought was "towards cautious
dulcification of the traditional [Catholic] view".
Accommodation Historian Manfred Hoffmann has described accommodation as "the single most important concept in Erasmus's
hermeneutic". For Erasmus, accommodation is a universal concept: humans must accommodate each other, must accommodate the church and
vice versa, and must take as their model how Christ accommodated the disciples in his interactions with them, and accommodated humans in his
incarnation; which in turn merely reflects the eternal mutual accommodation within the
Trinity. And the primary mechanism of accommodation is language, which mediates between reality and abstraction, which allows disputes of all kinds to be resolved and the gospel to be transmitted: using Latin
sermo (discourse, conversation, language) not
verbum (word) emphasizing the dynamic and interpersonal communication rather than static principle: "Christ incarnate as the eloquent oration of God": "He is called Speech [sermo], because through him God, who in his own nature cannot be comprehended by any reasoning, wished to become known to us." The role models of accommodation were Paul, that "
chameleon" (or "slippery squid") and Christ, who was "more mutable than
Proteus himself". Following Paul, Quintillian () and Gregory the Great's
Pastoral Care, Erasmus wrote that the orator, preacher or teacher must "adapt their discourse to the characteristics of their audience"; this made pastoral care the "art of arts". we now knowing the resurrection, Christ is revealed by the Gospels in a way that we can know him better by reading him than those who actually heard him speak; this will or may transform us. Since the Gospels become in effect like sacraments, for Erasmus reading them becomes a form of prayer In Hoffmann's words, for Erasmus "Christ is the of everything": "the focus in which both dimensions of reality, the human and the divine, intersect" and so He himself is the hermeneutical principle of scripture": "the middle is the medium, the medium is the mediator, the mediator is the reconciler". with the
Sermon on the Mount serving as the starting point, and arguably with the
Beatitudes and the
Lord's Prayer at the head of the queue. This privileges peacemaking, mercy, meekness, purity of heart, hungering after righteousness, poverty of spirit, etc. as the unassailable core of Christianity and piety and true theology. The Sermon on the Mount provides the axioms on which every legitimate theology must be built, as well as the ethics governing theological discourse, and the rules for validating theological products; Erasmus's treats the primary and initial teaching of Jesus in the first Gospel as a theological methodology. For example, "peacemaking" is a possible topic in any Christian theology; but for Erasmus, from the Beatitude, it must be a starting, reference and ending point when discussing all other theological notions, such as church authority, the Trinity, etc. Moreover, Christian theology must only be
done in a peacemaking fashion for peacemaking purposes; and any theology that promotes division and warmongering is thereby anti-Christian.
Mystical theology Another important concept to Erasmus was "the Folly of the Cross" the view that Truth belongs to the exuberant, perhaps ecstatic, and even
superficially repellent to us, rather than to the frigid worlds which intricate scholastic
dialectical and
syllogistic philosophical argument all too often generated; this produced in Erasmus a profound disinterest in hyper-rationality, and an emphasis on verbal, rhetorical, mystical, pastoral and personal/political moral concerns instead.
Theological writings Several scholars have suggested Erasmus wrote as an evangelist not an academic theologian. Even "theology was to be metamorphic speech, converting persons to Christ". Apart from these programmatic works, Erasmus also produce a number of prayers, sermons, essays, masses and poems for specific benefactors and occasions, often on topics where Erasmus and his benefactor agreed. His thought was particularly influenced by
Origen. He often set himself the challenge of formulating positive, moderate, non-superstitious versions of contemporary Catholic practices that might be more acceptable both to scandalised Catholics and Protestants of good will: the better attitudes to the sacraments, saints, Mary, indulgences, statues, scriptural ignorance and fanciful Biblical interpretation, prayer, dietary fasts, external ceremonialism, authority, vows, docility, submission to Rome, etc. For example, in his
Paean in Honour of the Virgin Mary (1503) Erasmus elaborated his theme that the Incarnation had been hinted far and wide, which could impact the theology of the fate of the remote unbaptised and grace, and the place of classical philosophy: ==Legacy and evaluations==