The Role of Humanism
If the Reformation owed an unwitting debt to Scholasticism, perhaps not in whole but at least in part, then it owed an equal debt to humanism.
The Reformation as Renewal: Retrieving the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, by Matthew Barrett
“I myself am convinced that without the knowledge of the [humanistic] studies, pure theology can by no means exist.” – Martin Luther
Barrett examines the relationship of the Reformation to humanism, which inherently entails an examination of the relationship of the Reformation to the Renaissance. As one might suspect, the lines between and among these are not so cut and dry, just as we have seen (here and here, for example) that the lines between the Reformers and the Scholastics are not – and as Barrett will show here, the lines between Scholasticism and humanism were not.
This understanding stands in the face of those who tie the humanist movement to a particular political or philosophical tradition. Like Scholasticism, humanism can be considered a method, a tool. These can rightly be considered means, not ends. Scholasticism focused on answering technical questions with precise, logical arguments; this in contrast to humanism which prized eloquent rhetoric.
What is meant by humanism? Fundamentally, it is a return to classical antiquity – the period preceding the so-called “Dark Ages.” The culture, the texts, the perspectives – these as found in this classical period could offer the seeds by which the then-present society could be reborn.
This meant a retrieval of the Greek and Roman sources from the period, not as an end, but a means of regaining a rhetorical eloquence in the pursuit of cultural and educational renewal. The closest humanism might be considered to a whole system of philosophy was when it touched on morality. Truth, goodness, and beauty: these could all be found – rediscovered – through sources ranging from Cicero to Virgil.
Francesco Petrarch, who lived in the fourteenth century, can be considered the first humanist. Like Luther, some two centuries later, Petrarch would give up on his parents’ desire for his law career and would retreat to the church. Unlike Luther, he did not pursue holiness – he had a real lust for women, with children born out of wedlock.
He also admired classical antiquity and its Latin corpus. He would receive honors for his poetry: from the Senate in Rome and from the Chancellor of the University of Paris. He would eventually be overcome by his conviction, much as Augustine was overcome, and driven to God in a like manner.
As an example of humanism properly being considered a means, consider the following two ends: some humanists came to envision a transcendent, universal humanism, while others saw how humanism would serve to elevate nationalism in their own country. Further, humanists in Italy held Scholasticism in disdain, while those in Spain welcomed Scholasticism.
With this as background, Barrett comes to Erasmus (1466 – 1536). Having escaped the plague that took his mother and some of his classmates, he would end up at a new school: the Brethren of the Common Life. This school would focus on a genuine, heartfelt conviction as opposed to a religious conformity masked by intellectual pride.
Although ordained a priest in 1492, his desire for humanist scholarship overtook this call. In 1495, he would travel to Paris, where he would meet and work with other humanist scholars. In 1499, he would travel to Oxford, having found a patron who would offer support. Through this, he would be introduced to Plato, and through a Platonist worldview he would make sense of the Pauline emphasis on the spiritual.
In 1505, Erasmus would publish Lorenzo Valla’s notes on the text of the New Testament. These notes would be instrumental to his questioning the Latin Vulgate. If not for Valla’s notes, the Erasmus we would have instead known would have been nothing like the Erasmus we do know today.
It was Valla who discovered that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery, proving that it was not authentic. In 1440, he would write of this:
“…what crime I am about to charge the Roman Pontiffs,” “enormous greed,” “they have defended it as being true, even while knowing it was false.”
His discovery discredited the papacy overnight. It was in this vein that Erasmus would also write his sarcastic tracts, exposing corruption in the church. But before he would do this, he would write his most popular work: Handbook [Enchiridion] of the Christian Soldier. It was a handbook for renewal, focusing on imitating Christ.
Erasmus was irritated with those who focused solely on literal interpretations of the Bible, just as he was disgusted with those who displayed an external piety without an internal renewal. Relics, icons, indulgences – these are meaningless to those who skim over the life and teaching of Christ. Christian authority should be found in one’s inner devotion, not in the authority of the priest. Such sentiments created a stir, no doubt, given the popularity of this work.
While much of this work sounds like the work of the Reformers, something – per the Reformers, the key thing – was missing: grace. The Christology that led Luther to not only moralistic changes but also theological changes was missing. This idea has come out strongly in my work through the Beatitudes, where D. Martin Lloyd Jones makes clear that it is impossible for a natural person – one without God’s grace – to live the life described by Christ.
Further, where Tyndale took the life-threatening step of translating the Greek into the vernacular (among other life-ending steps), Erasmus would take no similar risks.
Of course, Erasmus did step out meaningfully in his mocking of the medieval world: Scholasticism, monasteries, the papacy. But on theology, really nothing. In the early years of the Reformation, many felt Erasmus would eventually join the Reformers. However, in 1525, this idea was firmly put to bed. Erasmus did battle with Luther on the topic of the Bondage of the Will, and through this it would be clearly understood that Erasmus was no friend of the Reformation.
Until then, his direct target was not the Reformers but the Schoolmen (“subtle refinements of subtleties”), particularly the Scotists. He would also target monks and monasteries. Even the pope was not spared, as evidenced by his book, Julius Excluded from Heaven, depicting the account of Pope Julius being rejected by Peter at the gates – with the pope threatening Peter with excommunication for keeping the door barred!
As an aside, I recall reading elsewhere (and I have links at the end of this post) that Erasmus had to be somewhat strong-armed by the Church to engage Luther.
Beyond all of this, Erasmus’s most important work was his translation of the New Testament into Greek. Through this, he found the Latin Vulgate wanting, exposing various (and important) errors in that translation. And this was critical in Luther’s efforts, as it was the basis of Luther’s translation into German. Further, it offered to Luther the opportunity to consider his soteriology afresh.
Even here, the relationship of the Reformers to humanism can be seen – humanism as a means, using the sources to retrieve the church catholic. The Reformers would discover that the gospel they preached was anything but novel.
Conclusion
Was the Renaissance a movement separate from the Reformation? Were the Reformers part of the Renaissance? The two cannot be totally segregated: the Reformation was born out of the Renaissance environment, and used humanist methods in its advances.
It is reasonable to ask whether the Reformation was even possible apart from the prior advances of the Renaissance.
Yet, some Reformers were trained as humanists, and others were not. Yet even those who were not swam in the same humanist waters. But one cannot conclude that the Reformation is strictly a child of humanism. For example, Luther, on whom all credit or blame inappropriately lies (depending on which exaggerated extreme one believes) was trained as a Scholastic.
That humanism was a means can also be seen in the fact that both Catholics and Protestant used humanist tools to advance their ideas. The question remained – just how far would this divide travel? This will be explored next by Barrett.
Epilogue
I have previously done work on Michael Massing’s, Fatal Discord: Erasmus, Luther, and the Fight for the Western Mind. I have written the following posts, based on this book:
· Luther’s “Road to Damascus” Moments
Yes. The Reformation sprang out of the Renaissance. However, it represented an intellectual, theological movement that kept faith in God as a priority. Another vein of the Renaissance led to secular humanism and into the Enlightenment.
What the two had in common was a rediscovery of classical texts. Greek and Roman writing came out of Byzantium into Europe. For the Reformers, this meant a chance to read the original languages of the Bible and reform their theology based on the text. But others essentially went back to paganism and set up human accomplishment as the highest end.
https://thecrosssectionrmb.blogspot.com/