Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus, Dutch humanist and theologian, was born at Rotterdam, Holland, October 27, probably 1466. He died at Basel, Switzerland, on July 12, 1536. Information about his family and his early life comes from a few meager accounts he himself wrote or suggested at a somewhat advanced age, and from the many vague references which appear in his writings at all periods of his life. It appears he was born out of wedlock, but was well cared for by his parents until their early death. He received the best education open to a young man of his day in a series of monastic or semi-monastic schools. In light of later experience, he presents his early education as a long conspiracy to force him into the monastic life, but for this there exists no other evidence. He was admitted to the priesthood and took the monastic vows in 1492, but there is no record he ever exercised the priestly functions. Ironically, monasticism was one of the chief objects of attack in his lifelong assault upon what he saw as the faults of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

Erasmus was one of the most prominent and vocal scholars of his age, and was known throughout Europe. He was involved most notably in discussions concerning the state of the church. He felt called upon to use his learning in a purification of the doctrine and in a liberalizing of the institutions of Christianity. He began as a scholar, trying to free the methods of scholarship from the rigidity and formalism of medieval traditions, but was not satisfied with this. He conceived of himself as, above all else, a preacher of righteousness, and was convinced that what was needed to regenerate Europe was sound learning, applied frankly and fearlessly to the administration of public affairs in Church and State. It is this conviction that gives unity and consistency to a life which, at first sight, seems to have been full of fatal contradictions. Erasmus was a marked individual, holding himself aloof from all entangling obligations; yet he was, in a singularly true sense, the center of the literary movement of his time. In his correspondence, he put himself in touch with more than five hundred men of the highest importance in the world of politics and of thought, and his advice on all kinds of subjects was eagerly sought, and readily followed.

 

While visiting fellow humanist Thomas More in 1509, he composed In Praise of Folly (Encomium Moriae), his most famous and controversial work. Modeled after Lucian's classic Charon, the essay is written as an oratory delivered by the personification of Folly, in which Folly ironically praises foolish activities of the day. Included are attacks on superstitious religious practices, uncritical theories held by traditional scientists, and the vanity of Church leaders.

 

Pulling no punches, Erasmus attacks the behavior of church leaders at the highest levels. The bishops live like princes. He argues that their true function would be evident if they noted the symbolism of their attire. Their vestments represent a blameless life; their forked miter hats represent knowledge of the Old and New Testaments; their gloves represent freedom from contact with worldly business; their staff represents caring for their flock; the cross carried before them in processions represents victory over all earthly affections. The word "bishop" signifies that they are to labor, care, and trouble. Although cardinals are successors of the apostles, they too neglect their true function also represented by their attire. For example, the upper white garment signifies the remarkable and singular integrity of life. If they focused on their true responsibilities, they would not want to have the job. Popes take the place of Christ, and should try to imitate Christ's life, specifically his poverty, labor, doctrine, cross, and contempt of life. However, they seem to be more concerned with financial gain.

 

Throughout the entirety of his life he had never been called to account for his opinions by any official authority of the dominant Church. The attacks upon him were by private persons, and his protectors had always been men of the highest standing. After his death, in the zeal of the Roman Catholic reaction, his writings were honored with a distinguished place on the Index of prohibited books, and his name has generally had an evil sound in Roman Catholic ears. The extraordinary popularity of his books, however, has been shown in the immense number of editions and translations that have appeared from the sixteenth century until now, and in the undiminished interest excited by his elusive but fascinating personality.

 

If he lived today, it would be interesting to read his opinions of the Catholic hierarchy's response to pedophiliac priests.