How Did Erasmus' On Praise of Folly Influence the Protestant Reformation?

What can we learn from reflecting on Erasmus’ work,
On Praise of Folly?
How did On Praise of Folly influence the upcoming
Protestant Reformation?
Were Erasmus and Martin Luther allies or enemies in
the Reformation?
When should satire such as this work by Erasmus be
considered slanderous?

Please, we welcome interesting questions in the
comments. Let us learn and reflect together!
At the end of our talk, we will discuss the sources
used for this video. Feel free to follow along in the
PowerPoint script we uploaded to SlideShare.

YouTube Channel (click to subscribe):
Reflections on Morality, Philosophy, and History:
© Copyright 2023 Become a patron:
Erasmus, In Praise of Folly
https://youtu.be/FYuIbYlIx5U
https://www.patreon.com/seekingvirtueandwisdom
https://www.youtube.com/@ReflectionsMPH/?sub_confirmation=1
Not available from Amazon
Purchase from:
Institute of Byzantine and
Modern Greek Studies
https://ibmgs.org/patristic.html
https://amzn.to/40vgmE9

SlideShare contains scripts for my YouTube
videos. Link is in the YouTube description.
© Copyright 2023

Erasmus was born about fifteen years before Martin Luther in Rotterdam in the
Netherlands; he was an illegitimate son of a priest. His parents died from the plague
when he was a teenager. However, he had many good patrons, and he had the good
fortune of attending one the best Latin schools in the Netherlands where he also
studied Greek and theology. He was ordained as an Augustinian monk but was able
to leave the monastery to serve as the secretary of his patron, Bishop Henry of
Bergen, due to his reputation as a Latin scholar and his humanistic studies.
Although he was later offered a position as a professor, he preferred to be an
independent scholar supported by patrons and the publication of his widely read
works, as he was one of the most popular published authors of Europe. He had
published several works before In Praise of Folly, which he published in 1514.

Portrait of the Reformers, by Lucas
Cranach the Younger, 1550, Erasmus is at
the left shoulder of Luther.

Just a few years later, in 1516, Erasmus published the newly compiled
Greek New Testament, a year before Luther unwittingly started the
Protestant Reformation when he posted his Ninety-Five Theses on the
door of the Wittenberg cathedral. Luther translated a vernacular German
New Testament using Erasmus’ Greek text as a source.
Although the Protestant Reformation adopted many of the criticisms
Erasmus leveled at the church, Erasmus never left the Catholic Church.
Luther bitterly broke with Erasmus over the issue of free will, Luther
denying the role of free will. But Erasmus was uncomfortable with the
extreme polemics of his day on both sides, drawing the condemnation of
both Protestants and Catholics.

Luther at the Diet of Worms in 1521, by Anton von Werner, painted 1877

Luther Posting his 95 Theses in 1517, by Ferdinand Pauwels, painted 1872

In Praise of Folly
Dedicated to Sir Thomas More

Erasmus begins On Praise of Folly by dedicating it to his friend
Thomas More, and indeed he writes this work when he is on an
extended visit with More and is waiting for his library to be
delivered.
Sir Thomas More is known both for his literary works and his
prominent role in English politics. His most famous literary work
was Utopia, originally published in Latin in 1516. He contrasts the
contentious social life of European states with the orderly life of
his mythical Utopia, which was partially influenced by the ideals
of monasticism. Initially he was critical of Luther and the
Protestant Reformation.

During the reign of Henry VIII, Sir Thomas More served first as the Speaker of the
House of Commons, and later served as Lord Chancellor for the king. He refused to
sign the letter to the pope requesting permission to divorce Catherine of Aragon
when she was unable to give birth to an heir to the throne. More also refused to
take the required oath acknowledging King Henry VIII as the Supreme Head of the
Church of England rather than the pope. After he refused to attend the coronation
of Anne Boleyn, Henry VIII’s second wife, the king ordered his execution.
In Greek the word for folly sounds like “More,” so a secondary meaning of the title
could be, In Praise of Thomas More, and he compares his work to the classical
works by Lucian; Seneca’s satirical work on the deification of the hapless Emperor
Claudius; Plutarch’s humorous dialogue between Gryllus and Achilles, or Odysseus,
where Gryllus was one of his men who was turned into a pig by the witch Circe and
who explains why he prefers to remain a pig; and the Golden Ass by Apuleius.

Henry VIII, by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1537 / Queen Catherine of Aragon, 1520 / Anne Boleyn, 2nd queen, 1534

Meeting of Sir Thomas More with his daughter after his sentence of death, by William Frederick Yeames, 1872

In his dedication, Erasmus announces, “Let others judge
me as they will; yet unless self-love completely deceives
me, I have praised folly and not altogether foolishly.”
And Erasmus recognizes the spiritual danger of satire.
“In response to the charge of sarcasm, I reply that this
freedom has always been permitted to men of wit, that
in their satire they make fun of the common behavior of
men with impunity,” as long as they do not go too far.
Erasmus also posits that “he who censures the lives of
men without mentioning any names, I wonder if he
does not teach and warn rather than bite,” and this is
good advice, that you should avoid criticizing men in
print, even sometimes when they are public figures, to
avoid damaging their reputations. Erasmus of Rotterdam,
by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1523

And I say sometimes, because sometimes we can
directly criticize the policies and stances of public
figures, if it serves the public good.

In Praise of Folly Erasmus’ “Folly speaks: No matter what
people commonly say about me,” my
“influence makes both gods and men glad.”
But then Erasmus has Folly make
statements that appear on their face to be
completely contrary to the teachings of the
monastic Church Fathers and stoics: “I have
no use for those so-called wise persons
who say that it is absolutely stupid and
insolent for a person to praise himself. Let
them say it is foolish if they wish, but let
them admit that it is proper; for what is
more suitable that that Folly trumpet her
own praises?”
Illustration, In Praise of Folly

To understand the historical context, we need to understand how deeply
influential monasteries and the Catholic Church were in the Middle Ages,
which we discussed in our video on St John of the Cross. Most young men
today who are not sure what they want to do with their life, and do not
wish to attend college, sign up for military service. Young men in
medieval Europe did not have this option, monasteries or the priesthood
were the choice for young men who had few options. This was true to a
greater extent for young women, they found greater independence and
opportunities as nuns than were available to other medieval women.
Both in ancient and medieval times, monasteries were often spiritual
boot camps.

Erasmus is making the point that often you cannot tell folly
from wisdom, that which men take for wisdom is really
folly, and that which men take for folly is really wisdom.
There is a tradition of holy fools, particularly in the Eastern
Church, of holy fools who may, for example, ignore the
fasting rules by eating sausage on the steps of the church
during Lent, to emphasize that Love for God and neighbor
comes from the heart, not from making a show of fasting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foolishness_for_Christ

Erasmus is satirically making the same point as the
monastic writers themselves point out constantly, that it is
altogether too easy to succumb to pride when your pursuit
of asceticism is more for show, to impress your fellow
monks, than it is to increase the Love of God and neighbor
in your heart. Whether it is wise to make this point using
too easily misinterpreted satire is a valid question. Indeed,
this is a question we will examine, Is satire spiritually wise?

Erasmus’ Folly explains, “All emotion
belongs to Folly,” “emotions rule the
fool, while reason directs the wise
man. Thus, the Stoics exclude the
emotions as if they were diseases
from the wise man,” and emotions
are “spurs and stimuli in every
performance of virtue.”
Folly “hears the philosophers
disagreeing. They say that it is
misery to live in folly, to err, to be
deceived, and to be ignorant. On
this contrary, however, this is what
it is to be human.”
Illustration, In Praise of Folly

Erasmus’ Folly continues explaining why her
sarcasm is true: “I have no use for cosmetics. I
do not belie the interior of my heart by my
outward appearance. I am always myself and
they who take for themselves the title and
bearing of wise men are unable to disguise me
even though they walk about like apes in purple
robes or asses in lion skins.” Folly then derides
those who fancy themselves philosophers, but
who are really foolosopohers, “who subtly work
into their Latin orations a few Greek phrases as
embellishment” though they serve no purpose
other than to impress.

Such pretensions can fool the ignorant. But we must
ask ourselves: Does Folly cross over to slander here?

Copy after the Painting by Rubens, The Council of Gods, by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, 1861
Erasmus pictures Folly as an antihero of the
gods: his Folly states that “his father is neither
Chaos, Orcus, Saturn, Jupiter, or any other
ancient or moldy gods, but Plutus, god of
riches, the father of gods and men despite the
opinion of Homer, Hesiod, and Zeus himself.”

We will shortly cut a video on Hesiod’s Works and
Days, which was influential in ancient Greece, behind
Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey.

(REPEAT) At the nod of Plutus, “all things sacred and
profane are turned topsy-turvy.”
Indeed, even today, with the influence of the
Prosperity Gospel, do we not worship the wealthy as
more worthy than the needy, do we not seek to see
the wealthy rewarded for their so-called Christian
stewardship?

At the nod of Plutus, “all things sacred
and profane are turned topsy-turvy.”

Who is Folly’s mother, but “Youth, the most
beautiful nymph of all, and the gayest at that.”
Folly is born in “islands where there is no
labor, or old age, or any sickness.” What has
changed? Today we prefer our men to be
gaudily wealthy and distinguished, and our
women be ravishingly young super-models.

Sacrifice to Bacchus, by Massimo Stanzione, 1634
Erasmus’ Folly
satirizes her
antihero status by
praising gods who
are the mirror
images of the
vices that the
Church Fathers
and Stoics
condemn. Whose
breasts nurtured
the young Folly?
The two charming
nymphs
“Drunkenness,
offspring of
Bacchus,” god of
wine, “and
Ignorance,
daughter of Pan.”

Which other gods nurture folly?
• “Self-love, with her eyebrows raised so haughtily.
• Flattery, who claps her hands with laughing eyes.
• Forgetfulness, the drowsy one who looks as
though she were asleep.
• Laziness, who leans on her elbows with her hands
folded.”

Which other gods nurture folly?
(continued)
• “Pleasure, who wears the wreath
of rose and smells of perfume.
• Madness, who rolls her eyes to
and fro,” who is also an attribute
of Bacchus, god of wine.
• Also, Sensuality, Intemperance,
and Sound Sleep.”
Sacrifice to Bacchus, by Massimo Stanzione, 1634

https://youtu.be/m4mcP2F9c4w
https://youtu.be/Dhd543kov-E https://youtu.be/0qHpReZYhv4
Then Erasmus’ Folly mocks stoicism. Folly
exclaims, “Would life without pleasure be called
life at all? You applaud!” “The Stoics, however,
spurn pleasure, or at least they carefully pretend
to; they attack it assiduously in public but only so
that they may enjoy it the more once.” But “what
part of life is not sad, troublesome, graceless,
flat, and burdensome unless you have pleasure,
the seasoning of Folly, added to it?”

Since entertainment is affordable and available in the
modern world, even those who earn little can afford
the movies and television and vacations, we really
live more of an Epicurean rather than Stoic lifestyle.
This is in contrast with the ancient world, when only
the wealthy could afford an Epicurean lifestyle.

Folly Reflects on Children and Marriage
Suffer the Children to Come Unto Me, by Jacob Jordaens, 1615 / Jesus Heals the Sick, by Gabriel Von Max, ~1900

After turning on their head the lists of vices of the
Stoics and Church Fathers, showing many to actually
be virtues, then Folly reflects on how we should treat
those who are close to us with love and forbearance,
advice that is not counter to Christian teaching.

Folly does ask a good question, lest we take
ourselves too seriously, “Who does not know
that childhood is by far the happiest period of
man’s life and that it is much more pleasant for
everyone? For what is there about little children
that makes us kiss and hug and fondle them so
that even an enemy would help someone of this
age? The charm of Folly, of course, that prudent
nature bestows on the toddler.” We all know
that “as youth matures through experience and
education, the sparkle of its beauty begins to
fade; its zest diminishes; its charm cools; and its
vigor falls off.” “Folly is the only thing that makes
fleeting youth linger and staves off ugly old age.”
Infant Jesus with John, by Victor Wolfvoet II, 1652

Indeed, the story of how Jesus blesses the little
children, bidding his disciples to let the children
come unto him, directly precedes the story of the
rich young man, who asks what he needs to do to be
perfect, that is, to Love God, and to love your
neighbor as yourself. Children are charming in their
naivete, we need to recapture this by being
purposefully naïve, being as eager to forgive the
faults of our neighbor as Christ is eager to forgive us.

Suffer the Little Children to come unto Me, by Pieter van Lint, 1690

Folly tells us, “According to the Stoic definition,
wisdom is nothing other than being guided by
reason. Folly, on the other hand, is swayed by the
whim of passion. But, in order that man’s life
should not be completely sad and gloomy, Zeus
puts in us five times more passion than reason,
placing reason in a narrow corner in our head,
leaving the rest of the body to the passions. Zeus
also instills two violent tyrants against reason:
• Anger, which occupies the heart, the very font
of life in the breast.
• Lust, which rules a wide empire farther down
even to the private parts.” Jupiter, or Zeus, chasing a river nymph,
by Filippo Lauri, 1644

Then Folly says some
unflattering things about silly
women, before commenting
that “the cheeks of women
are always smooth, their
voices gentle, and their skin
soft as if taking part in
eternal youth. Besides, what
more do they want in life
than to please men?”
Beauty, Directed by Prudence, Rejects with Scorn the
Solicitations of Folly, by Angelica Kauffmann, 1780

Most monastic works do not discuss marriage directly, but many of the
Old Testament stories draw moral lessons from the marriage and family
lives of the patriarchs. There is also a verse in the Old Testament that
mandates that when a young Jewish soldier in the army becomes
married, that he should not be separated from his newlywed wife for
the first year of his marriage.
We also have the verse from St Paul exhorting us that spouses should
not deny the other affection, except for a time of prayer by mutual
consent.
Just as the folly of pleasure and joy enhances our life with our children,
so frivolity also enlivens our friendships, and in particular our
marriages.

Jacob and Rachel
Leaving the
House of Laban,
by Charles-
Joseph Natoire,
1732

Folly observes: “Indeed, what divorces or worse
would come about if married life were not upheld
and nourished by flattery, joking, compromise,
ignorance, and duplicity, all satellites of mine?”
Folly encourages the “wife to please her husband,
and the husband to please his wife, so that the
marriage will endure.” “No union in life can be
happy or lasting without me. A people will not
long bear with its prince, nor a master his
servant, nor a maid her mistress, nor a teacher
his student, nor a friend his friend, nor a wife her
husband, nor a landlord his tenant, unless they
make mistakes together or individually, flatter
each other, wisely overlook things, and soothe
themselves with the sweetness of folly.” Jacob and Rachel, by Didier Descouens, 1720

Folly asks, “will a
person love anyone
else if he hates
himself? Will he be
harmonious with
other people when
he cannot get along
with himself? Will
he bring happiness
to anyone else
when he is sullen
and grouchy with
himself?”
Last Days of Erasmus, by Hendrik Albert van Trigt, 1879

Folly Warns Us To Avoid False Religion
Erasmus in his Study, by Jan August Hendrik Leys, 1854 / Desiderius Erasmus, by Albrecht Dürer, 1526

Erasmus does not organize his Praise of Folly into logical sections, but in the middle, he does
transition from the spiritually dangerous satire of the teachings of the monastic church Fathers
and Stoics to critiques and warnings on how easily the religious life can be subverted, warnings
against false religion that we should heed. He remarks how many Christians in his day are too
quick to believe stories of ghosts and goblins, and how gazing on an icon will prevent them from
dying on that saint’s day, and how foolish it is to pray that you will become rich.
One common superstition that both Erasmus and Luther derided was the sale of indulgences,
which technically does not forgive sins, but rather reduces the time your soul spends in Purgatory,
a theological subtlety that was lost on the many ignorant peasants who purchased these
indulgences, as well as the salesman monks who sold them. This was wrapped up in the resented
practice of Rome selling bishoprics, which were worth as considerable sum as the bishops could
profit from the rents and benefices of the bishopric. They would often finance this purchase with
a bank loan, and then sell indulgences to pay off the loan. Both the theology and business ethics
of selling forgiveness for tidy sums were questionable and resented by the truly devout. The
Council of Trent began the process of reforming many of these corrupt practices.

Foreshadowing the issue that will spark Luther’s
Reformation, Folly also reflects on the
foolishness of “calculating the time to be spent
in Purgatory down to the year, month, day and
hour,” “relying on magical prayers and charms
sold by some charlatan” “for their profit.”
Echoing a later observation by Luther, many
“businessmen, soldiers, or judges donate a small
coin thinking it will pardon all his perjury, lust,
drunkenness, fighting, murder, fraud, lying, and
treachery. After doing this, he thinks that he can
start a new round of sinning with a clean slate.”
Indeed, what upset Luther was the abuse of
even selling indulgences for future misbehavior. Martin Luther Translating the Bible,
Wartburg Castle, by Eugene Siberdt, 1898

Folly imagines what would happen if
a “troublesome wise man spoke the
truth: ‘You will not be freed from
your sins unless you add to the
payment of money: hatred for evil,
tears, vigils, prayers, and fasting; and
if you change your whole way of
living. A saint will take care of you if
you imitate him.’ If a wise man said
things of this type, I say, he would
take all the happiness out of life and
throw the world into a tumult.”
Portrait of Erasmus, by Quinten Metsys, 1517

Folly reflects on how we worship the
success that wealth brings, and how
many acquire wealth: “The most
foolish and sordid of all are your
merchants.” “Sometimes they lie, they
perjure themselves, they steal and
cheat, and they impose on the public.
Yet they consider themselves
important men because they have gold
rings on their fingers. Nor do they
hesitate to flatter the friars who
admire them and call them right
Honorable in public, so they will earn a
donation from the ill-gotten gains” of
this cheating.
The Cure of Folly, Extraction of the Stone of Madness,
by Hieronymus Bosch, 1500's

Folly Criticizes Clergy Who Are Corrupt
The monks repast, by Walter Dendy Sadler, 1900’s / Netherlands, 1700’s

We purposefully word this heading, Folly criticizes clergy who are
corrupt, because Erasmus clearly is only criticizing the Catholic clergy
who are corrupt, he does not argue that the Catholic Church itself is
corrupt. Unfortunately, Luther and polemic Protestants goes further, and
they shout that the Catholic Church itself is corrupt, and by extension
Catholic clergy, which demonstrates the spiritual danger of Erasmus’
satire. We are not condemning Erasmus for Folly’s barbs, for he discusses
genuine clerical abuses, and indeed imperfect clergy has and always will
be a problem with the church, as seen in the famous icon of the Ladder
of Divine Ascent, where the demons pull down clergy climbing up the
ladder to salvation.

Folly criticizes both corrupt clergy
and those who are deluded by a false
application of scholasticism: “These
theologians are happy in their self-
love, as if they were in a third
heaven, looking down on all men as
though they were animals that
crawled along the ground, coming
near to pity them. They are protected
by a wall of scholastic definitions,
arguments, corollaries, and implicit
and explicit propositions.”

Folly lists silly questions that
some shallow scholastics ask,
such as: “When did divine
generation occur? Are there
several sonships in Christ?”
“Could God the Father have
taken upon Himself the likeness
of a woman, a devil, an ass, a
gourd, or a piece of flint?”

Perhaps Folly is a bit harsh, too mocking. There are
academics in any age that like to show off their
knowledge, but since scholars in all ages ask sincere
questions, such satire can cause harm and achieves
little good, and can discourage people from
studying to improve themselves.

Folly reflects: “Although the apostles
teach grace, yet they never determine the
difference between a grace freely given
and the one that makes one deserving.
They urge us to do good works, but they
don’t separate work in general, work
being done, and work that is already
finished. At all times they inculcate
charity, but they don’t distinguish infused
charity from that which is acquired, or
state whether charity is an accident or a
substance, created or uncreated.”
Statue of Erasmus in Rotterdam,
by Hendrick de Keyser, 1622

This criticism is valid, although interpretation is needed for biblical
passages that are terse and difficult to understand, so perhaps this
criticism is overdrawn.
Folly goes too far when she criticizes monks, Luther would later repeat
these criticisms, and Protestants in Germany, England, and in other
places would use these criticisms to justify seizing church property to
add to the wealth of kings and nobility. How many monks and nuns
were turned out into the streets without any regard of how they could
make a living? One depressing truth was that the Protestant
Reformation could not be reversed as that would mean that kings and
nobility might need to return stolen church property.

Dissolved and
abandoned
Monasteries in
England, l-r:
Ruins of St Mary's
Abbey, York,
founded 1155,
destroyed 1539
Furness Abbey in
Cumbria,
dissolved in 1537
Ruins of Fountains
Abbey, Yorkshire

Folly says that “most people detest monks so
much that accidentally meeting one is
considered to be bad luck, thought the monks
themselves believe they are magnificent
creatures.” “When braying out their gospels in
church they think they are pleasing God,”
when they are merely repeating Psalms rather
than praying them from their hearts. Some
monks from the mendicant orders, such as
the Franciscans, “make a good living from
their uncleanliness and beggary by bellowing
their petitions for food from door to door.”
This disdain of charity discourages generosity,
this is unfortunately one aspect of many
modern Christians.

Martin Luther with reformers, Erasmus is not included, as he remained loyal to the Catholic Church, 1600’s
Folly Criticizes the Established Church

Luther once commented in frustration how the
Catholic Church only had one pope to deal with,
but that he, Luther, with dozens of Protestant
Princes of small German states, he had dozens of
popes to battle.

Likewise, Folly reflects on how princes were
commonly “ignorant of the laws; an enemy of the
public; intent on private gain; taken to pleasure;
against knowledge, liberty, and truth; never
concerned with the safety of the state; and finally
measuring everything in terms of his own desire
and profit.”
It was common in the Middle Ages for bishops to
rule as secular rulers, and Folly likewise complains
that “our popes, cardinals, and bishops have”
become like princes, “beating these noblemen at
their own game,” bishops often delegating the
spiritual responsibilities of bishops to their
subordinates. Portrait of Erasmus, by School of Hans
Holbein the Younger, 1528

Folly reflects that bishops often
“proceed with pomp and with such
titles as Beatitude, Reverence, and
Holiness.” These bishops all too often
find that “to educate the people is
irritating; to pray is a waste of time; to
interpret Sacred Scripture is a mere
formality; to weep is distressing and
womanish; to live in poverty is
ignominious;” “and to die is unpleasant,
to die on the cross, dishonorable.”
Cure of Folly, Extraction of Stone of
Madness, by Hieronymus Bosch, 1500's

Erasmus’ Folly then discusses how damaging some papal
interdicts can be to the faith, how popes are often too quick to
issue “interdictions, excommunications, anathemas, edicts,” and
problematic papal bulls. Interdictions were papal suspensions of
the administrations of sacraments in the realms where the ruler
was at odds with the church, which could last for decades, and
which mainly served to erode the faith of common Christians.
Erasmus also criticizes those popes who take up arms to defend
or protect the sovereignty of the Papal States.

Pope Julius II on the walls of the conquered city of Mirandola, by Raffaello Tancredi, 1890

What should we expect from our bishops and
priests? Folly explains by quoting a verse that was
misinterpreted in the Middle Ages and is often
misinterpreted today to justify the unholy trinity of
God, guns, and football, to justify the arming of
Christians against supposed enemies.

Folly explains that the Scriptures
exhort that “whoever has a bag, let
him take it, and whoever does not
have a sword, let him sell his coat
and buy a sword.” But Folly
explains this verse means that
Christians should “equip
themselves with the sword of the
spirit that enters the inmost
recesses of the heart and severs
from it” everything that conflicts
with piety. This interpretation is
confirmed by the instruction by
Jesus to put away the sword.
The Ear of
Malchus, by
James Tissot,
1894
When Jesus is
betrayed in the
Garden of
Gethsename,
Peter cuts off
the ear of the
soldier Malchus,
but Jesus tells
him to put up
his sword and
heals the
soldier.

This type of interpretation is in line with St
Augustine’s teaching in On Christian Doctrine, or
One Christian Teaching, that a proper
interpretation of Scripture is one that increases in
us the two-fold love of God and neighbor.

Folly asks, “what else does
the expression ‘Woe to you,
Scribes and Pharisees,’ mean
other than, ‘Woe to you who
are wise?’” “Jesus takes his
greatest delight in little
children, women, and
fishermen,” “preferring to
ride upon a humble donkey.
The Holy Spirit came down
from heaven in the guise of a
dove, rather than an eagle or
hawk. The Holy Scriptures
celebrate deer, fawns, lambs,”
and “sheep as those who are
destined to immortal life.”
Mary Magdalene Anointing Christ’s Feet in the House of Simon the Pharisee, by Artus Wolffort, 1641

Folly’s Summary
Let the Little Children Come unto Jesus,
by Carl Bloch, 1800
Folly sums up her view of true Christianity, where
true wisdom is often seen as folly. “If you want
proof, take a look at children, old women, and
fools and see how they, more than others, take
great pleasure in religion, they seem to have a
natural impulse to stand closer to the altar.” The
first disciples, “embracing simplicity, became the
most severe enemies of learning. And finally,
what fool could be more foolish than the fool
consumed by the ardor of religion? They throw
away their wealth, they neglect injuries, permit
themselves to be deceived, fail to discriminate
between friend and foe, shrink from pleasure,
and cram themselves with hunger, vigils, tears,
and labors. They prefer death to life.”

Folly refers to Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, the central story in the
Platonic dialogue, the Republic, where the reality that most men
accept is nothing more than vague shadows of representations
displayed on the walls of the cave. Plato describes how those few who
venture to climb out of the cave are dazzled by the sunlight of
enlightened reality. St Gregory of Nyssa teaches us that we need to
continue this climb fleeing ignorance, climbing the mountain to
greater revelation of Christian virtue. CS Lewis’ great book, the Great
Divorce, imagines that the residents of Hell can still choose, though
nearly all refuse, to board the bus to climb into the bright sun and visit
a brighter place, the foothills of the mountains where the faithful
climb in their eternal quest for perfection and union with Christ.

https://youtu.be/wuqwy3GyO_4
Folly reminds us: “What happened in the cave of Plato’s myth, where he who escaped the
cave told the others bound within that the outside held realities rather than shadows, is the
fate of most men.” Both think the other is mad. “The majority of mankind values most riches,
bodily comforts, and finally the soul, which many do not even believe in, as they have not
seen it with their eyes. The pious agree in directing their efforts first toward God, the purest
of all existence, and in the second place, in what comes closest to Him, namely the soul.”

Folly reminds us of the tension between
the vulgar and the devout. “The pious,
since they aim primarily at what is almost
alien to the crass senses, are numbed and
stunned by the sensual. In contrast, the
ordinary person gravitates towards them.”
Thus, many negligent people value bodily
sensations such as “sex, love of food,
sleep, anger, pride, and envy. The pious
wage a constant war against these urges,
whereas the vulgar crowd considers that
without them life has no real existence.” Portrait of Desiderius Erasmus,
by Hans Holbein the Younger, 1528

Folly’s Dilemma: Can Satire Be Slanderous?
https://youtu.be/WAroedUiytY

Before we read this famous work by Erasmus, we reflected on the work, Christian
Morality, by St Nicodemus, a renowned Orthodox scholar of the eighteenth century,
who originally collated and published a collection of Greek manuscripts by the
Eastern Church Fathers, the Philokalia. St Nicodemus reflects the teachings of prior
Eastern Church Fathers in his teaching that Christians should not joke or jest, though
they can smile and carefully humorous. His teaching does not need to be followed
literally, as they reflect both a monastic mindset and a desire to be seen as devout
by their morally restrictive Moslem neighbors, but they do provide warnings of the
spiritual dangers of jokes, jests, and by extension, satire, such as in Erasmus’ work,
In Praise of Folly.

The more serious spiritual danger is that biting
humor and satire can begin a progression, and the
end result of this progression in Erasmus’ day was
the Protestant Reformation. St Nicodemus warns
us: “Often from an indecent word our mind
entertains” indecent thoughts; “from
entertainment it gives assent; from assent it
succumbs to evil deeds; from evil deeds it develops
a proclivity for sin, forming a bad habit; bad habits
descend into uncaring impenitence, which leads to
despair; and from despair our soul is flung into Hell
and perdition.” “What a great fire is ignited by the
small flame from a shameful tongue.”

The gentle satire of Erasmus all too quickly deteriorated
into the brutal, bloody, take-no-prisoners polemics of the
Protestant Reformation, breeding a toxic triumphalism
that infects most Christian denominations up to the
current day.

St Basil notes in His time on
earth, the “Lord experienced
those emotions that arise from
the flesh, and those that attest
to virtue, such as weariness and
pity for the afflicted,” but in the
“Gospels, at no time did he
consent to laugh,” although the
Scriptures records that Jesus
wept four times.

To find the source of any direct
quotes in this blog, please type in
the phrase to the search box in
my blog to see the referenced
footnote.
YouTube Description has links for:
• Script PDF file
• Blog
• Amazon Bookstore
© Copyright 2022
Blog and YouTube Description
include links for Amazon books
and lectures mentioned, please
support our channel with these
affiliate commissions.
Blog: https://wp.me/pachSU-Mw

https://www.meetup.com/Reflections/

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLqDkfFbWhXOnzdjp__YZtg/

How Did Erasmus' On Praise of Folly Influence the Protestant Reformation?

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Reflections on Morality, Philosophy, and History

More from Reflections on Morality, Philosophy, and History (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

How Did Erasmus' On Praise of Folly Influence the Protestant Reformation?