Regional Synod of Canada - Reformed Church in America

Pioneer Christian Monthly

Date - Jan/77

Contributor - Harvey Vanfarowe

Title - Differences Between Two Great men

Topic - Church History

Martin Luther and Desiderius Erasmus were both endued with greatness. They were contemporaries, although Erasmus was eighteen years older. They both were Christians and both were leaders, obviously great leaders. Of Luther's leadership we need not say more at this point. Of Erasmus's, Schaff affirms, he was "the king among scholars in the early part of the sixteenth century . . . the admired leader of scholastic Europe from Germany to Italy and Spain, from England to Hungary". Luther acknowledged that Erasmus, who, incidentally was originally from Rotterdam, excelled him in writing ability.

Both had a definite Christian witness. Though Erasmus is thought of as a humanist, and was in a sense, he was very different from many humanists who ridiculed Christianity. Erasmus said, "I could not endure to sit down at table with such men". He "confessed Christ in his writings", regarded the Bible as from the Lord, and lived in a "Christ-like" way in many respects.

Yet as far as Christian courage, theological depth, and intensity of conviction are concerned, Luther outranked this gifted man. He took a much more clear cut stand against error and for truth. His convictions were more steeped in Scripture; Erasmus's showed more influence from classical writers. The latter seemed content at times to compromise while from Luther you get the feeling of Isaac Watts' hymn, "I'm not ashamed to own my Lord, or to defend His cause". The reformer reminds one of Paul and of a brave Christian soldier. Erasmus admitted he could let go of "a part of the truth for the peace of the church" while Luther stood up and spoke up strongly for the truth. He felt that Erasmus had "more love of peace than love of the cross". Erasmus stayed with the Roman Catholic church while Luther left it.

Theologically, Erasmus was more liberal. Though he was criticized by a fanatical fringe of his religion and even called "antichrist" by some, though some of his books were burned or condemned by those who resisted almost all reforms, yet the humanistic influence left its mark on him and, he showed tendencies to be unorthodox. On the Trinity, he wrote, "The Father is very frequently called God, the Son sometimes, the Holy Spirit never". He also questioned whether John wrote the book of Revelation, and he nearly worshipped some non-Christian writers. After quoting from Socrates, he said, "I can often hardly restrain myself from exclaiming "Holy Socrates, pray for us', 'Schaff).

An important point where he was weak was with regard to depravity and the power of the will. Though Erasmus believed in divine grace for salvation he attributed to the human will too much ability and credit. Luther saw and experienced far more of its "bondage". He saw the will as enslaved and realized more deeply the utter necessity of the grace of God.

The two of them differed markedly on this point. In 1524 Erasmus wrote, "The Freedom of the Will" in opposition to Luther. Schaff says, he "took offence at the denial of free-will and human merit. He held the Catholic view on these subjects". Luther didn't reply publicly for over a year but in December of 1525 he published his "Slavery of the Will". it taught quite another viewpoint, the viewpoint of the apostle Paul and of Augustine. Paul, you remember said, "the good that I would, I do not, but the evil which I would not, that I do . . . o wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver, me from this body of death?" And he magnified very much the grace of God. Similarly, Augustine, as M. E. Osterhaven reminds us, thought of the human race as "hopelessly lost without the help of God".

It is implied that Erasmus did not live in the Scripture as much as did Luther and this is likely true as in Scripture we are confronted again and again with the inability of "the will of the flesh". We are also confronted there with the resurrection power of Christ. One example is the New Testament statement "and you He made alive when you were DEAD through the trespasses and sins in which you once walked This is not to say that man, made alive by Christ's Spirit and give grace to open his heart, must not do so. Man is to work out his salvation with fear and trembling for God is at work ... both to will and to do for His good pleasure". But it is by grace that we are saved".

Actually, Erasmus wrote to others that he hadn't read much of Luther; one has the feeling he could have profited much, theologically, if he had read him more. Perhaps, as Schaff suggests, he was too "anxious to retail the friendship of his hierarchical and royal patrons". Also, as a man of much culture and refinement, he was somewhat turned away by the reformer's rough and blunt way of writing. Yet, overall, one has the feeling Erasmus lacked moral courage for in many ways he had sympathized with the Reformation. In fact some of his critics contended he "laid the egg which Luther hatched".

Eventually, the split between Erasmus and Luther became very wide. Erasmus wrote a "bitter" piece about Luther and Luther came to call Erasmus a "scoffer" and an "enemy of all religion". That was so different from an earlier time when he wrote to him, "The whole world must bear witness to your successful cultivation of that literature by which we arrive at a true understanding of the Scriptures, and this gift of God has been magnificently and wonderfully displayed in you, calling for our thanks."

We see again that the failings of Christians, both theological and in attitudes, can bring about much dishonor to God's name. Both Erasmus and Luther erred at some point. How we need to pray for strength to be strong both theologically and in our dispositions that we may not be stumbling blocks to our great faith, or keep the world from believing that God has "sent" His Son.

Please click the "Back" button of your browser to return to previous page.