Desiderius Erasmus: The Praise of Folly

Explanation and Analysis of the Document

Erasmus's attack on the foolishness of superstitious belief is highlighted by his discussion of the “class of fools” who adored paintings of Saint Christopher (d. 251) and the horse of Saint George (d. 303). Yet, for Erasmus, the willingness of people to believe in and worship anything in the hope of religious salvation was at its most insidious with the practice of selling indulgences. This practice of the Catholic Church allowed people to pay for the removal or partial abatement of their sins. The theology behind the Church's use of indulgences evolved from the Treasury of Merit, in which Christ's sacrifice on the cross and the virtues and penances of the saints had created forgiveness that the Church could bestow on its followers. Initially, forgiveness followed the sinner's confession and absolution, but over time the Church began to sell forgiveness through indulgences for money. Ultimately, this practice led to its condemnation by Martin Luther in his Ninety-five Theses (1517) and the Reformation. For both Luther and Erasmus, individuals could not buy their way into heaven; they must atone for their sins through penance and good works. However, the loyal Catholic Erasmus was attacking this abuse of power by the Church in order to abolish the practice and return the Church to its glorious past.

This abuse of power by the Church for financial gain had spread into a number of areas, according to Erasmus—such as the tendency of religious bodies “to give preference to its particular guardian saint,” which was simply another method of manipulating people's superstitions. In doing so, they could play on the individual's need for salvation by attracting pilgrims to generate income for their particular church. This potential for creating revenue had not escaped a number of priests, who perceived “how many tidy little sums accrue to them from such sources.” The complicity of members of the Church in this process of financial gain ran counter to God and true notions of salvation and the message of Christ. This loss of true direction by some followers, as well as certain clergy and monks, was seen not only in the proliferation of saints but also in the cult of the Virgin Mary, “to whom the common man now attributes almost more than to her Son.” The focus of Christianity for Erasmus was Christ, not his mother.

These alterations of the simple and true message of Christianity had been supported by the works of theologians, whom Erasmus mocked as close-minded and esoteric. In Erasmus's opinion, theologians had developed the message of the Bible and created conclusions that were designed to shape the Church and its rules, to which its followers were to submit. Their control of the true nature of religion, their self-importance, and their sophistry had little relevance for the vast majority of followers or the original message of Christ. As Folly states, the “apostles would not have replied” to these theological questions “with the acuteness” of these theologians, and they knew Christ and his religion intimately.

Erasmus's point was that their knowledge of and faith in Christ's message were pure, simple, and unpolluted by other considerations, such as Church power and wealth. Such avarice, symbolized by the behavior of some monks who were “a long ways from religion” reflected the loss of true faith and virtue seen in the Catholic Church in early-sixteenth-century Europe. The problem with this behavior and the constructed religion of the Church by its theologians was that it moved Christianity away from the simple and true message of Christ: “I told you plainly in my gospel, with no disguising parables, that my Father's kingdom was promised, not for cowls, petitions, and fastings, but for deeds of love. I know them not who rely on their own merits.”