All this seems reasonable enough if it be true that the monks were as injudicious in their efforts to add to their numbers as he says they were, and we need have no doubt that some instances of such mistaken zeal came to his notice, and possibly flagrant ones. But when he expresses his disapproval of ceremonies, or of the singing of the Psalms, or of bodily toil as outward expositions of interior religion, he opens up a vast and oft-debated question, and one which involves the retention or abolition of the entire Church Liturgy. The Liturgy in general signifies a form of prayer and ceremonial established by ecclesiastical authority, to be used in the public services of the Church. In this limited sense the Lord's Prayer is liturgical, as are the set forms used in the administrations of the Sacraments. The Liturgy of the Church was at all times beautiful and impressive, and was originally intended to be so. It centred principally around the Sacraments, but as most of these were abolished during the Reformation the liturgical accompaniments naturally suffered the same fate. The world in general recognizes that this was a mistake, for it left the services in the reformed church very drab and cold, and they thus soon lost their hold on the affections of the people. In some countries, notably in England, attempts are being made to remedy this defect by re-introducing portions of the ancient ritual. However, since the Liturgy is not of the essence of Catholic faith, but only an administrative and devotional set of formulas devised by the wisdom of some of the great fathers in the Church, we need not occupy ourselves further with it here, except to advert to the fact which Erasmus sought to point out, that religion per se and the forms in which it is presented are two different and distinct entities.

As to his advice against making bodily toil assume for the monks a form of religion, we must disagree with Erasmus entirely. They elected to work in the early days that they might not become slothful and indolent. They found the hardest drudgery the surest remedy against unruly passions, and in mortifying the flesh they offered up to the Creator the gift of a pure heart. And not only did they work for their own salvation, but also for the moral and physical well-being of their fellow-men. In the earlier Middle Ages it was they who taught the secrets of intensive agriculture to the peasantry of Europe, and turned swamps and deserts into beauty spots for the use and delectation of humanity. They instructed the young, healed the sick, consoled the dying, fed the poor, and defended the weak. And morning, noon, and night they offered up these works of theirs to the Most High; and we cannot deny that such action was the highest form of religion which has ever at any time been practiced. But Erasmus practiced a purely personal and subjective form of religion which was highly intellectual; and he could not appreciate the fact that there might be others who willingly chose to honor God with the humble labors of their hands, just as he had chosen to devote to God the labors of his mighty mind. He must have known, but evidently had lost sight of, the dictum: "It is the intention which qualifies the act."

Now we may well assume that all this was not lost sight of in the

monastery at Steyn, and must have been the occasion for much comment of various sorts as to the ideas and opinions that the wandering brother was sending forth to a wondering world. Things were greatly changed in the community, for Prior Nicholas Werner, his tried and trusty friend, was dead, and in his place had been elected his old friend. and comrade Servatius Rogerus. Now, as intimate and as ardent as was their friendship in those early days, the fact that for twelve years Erasmus in his letters made no mention of Servatius might indicate that their relations were not as friendly as of yore, and that the election of Servatius as Prior, and consequently his Superior, might not be regarded by him as an occasion for jubilation. However this may be, we know by a letter which he shortly sent to Servatius that the latter had written to him plainly, and had set forth in measured and incisive terms that he must render an account of his goings and comings, and must by no means forget that he was a member of the community at Steyn, and, as such, bound to defer in all things to the authority of his Superior. The occasion for the letter which Servatius sent him was his going over to England presumably without getting previous permission from his Prior; although he insists that he had written him before setting out. However, we will quote the letter, which if we only read between the lines teaches us considerable:

I wrote to you long before I left Paris, and I suppose that letter was delivered to you; yet such is the carelessness of messengers that I fear somewhat that it may have been lost. So if perchance I am at fault I will make reparation for it by the diligence and frequency of my writing to you. It would take a long time to explain to you why I went to England, especially in view of the fact that I was formerly despoiled of my money there, but chances not to be despised seemed to be offered me; and I trust that you will believe me in this, that I went to England not without grave reasons, and by the advice of prudent men; and, furthermore, how the thing may turn out is in the hands of Providence, although I sought not wealth, but a quick way to learning.

I have now been several months with my friend Lord Mountjoy, who with great earnestness invited me to England, at the solicitation of all the learned men here. As a matter of fact, there are in London five or six fine scholars in both languages, such, I think, as not even Italy itself can produce at the present moment. I make no claim for myself, but, as it appears, there is not one of these men who does not make much of my talent and learning. And if in any way it were allowable to boast, I would do so for this especial reason, that I am esteemed by such men as these, towards whom there is no one so envious, no one so unfriendly, that he will not cede to them the leadership in literary matters. But I consider nothing accomplished unless I am approved by Christ as well, on whose judgment alone depends all our happiness. Farewell. London, from the Bishop's Palace. 1505 (ad fin.?).*

Eras. Ep. 185.

We may properly infer from this letter that Servatius had demanded to know why he had gone over to England without letting him know, and what was his object in so doing. Also we may fairly deduce from it that Servatius had admonished him of the danger in which he stood of becoming worldly and, in his zeal for learning, forgetting his spiritual interests. And then there is always present in the correspondence with Steyn a note which plainly says that he is at least understood and properly esteemed outside the monastic walls. Evidently the reply of Erasmus was not very pleasing to Prior Servatius, for he did not deign to answer it. This we learn from the following letter of Erasmus, which reached Steyn a few months afterwards. The silence of his Superior must have been disquieting to him, as he was left in ignorance of the Prior's intentions towards him, and we have already seen that Erasmus was of a suspicious and apprehensive nature. So he writes as follows, addressing his letter this time more formally and with greater deference to Father Servatius:

I have already sent several letters to you, and I am astonished that you have not sent me a syllable in reply. Here in London, as it appears, I am still on the most friendly terms with the greatest and most learned men of all England. The King of England has promised me a benefice; but the arrival of our Prince in England has compelled him to delay the matter.

As for myself, I am continually turning over and over in my mind how I can devote entirely to religion and to Christ what still remains to me of life (and indeed how long or short that may be I know not). I perceive the life of man, even when it is long, to be fleeting and soon over, and that I have a weak frame whose strength has been exhausted not a little by my studious labors, as well as by misfortunes. I see no end to my studies, since it seems to me every day that I am only beginning. Content, therefore, with my mediocrity (especially since I have acquired enough Greek), I have decided to devote myself to meditating on death, and to setting my soul to rights. I ought to have done this long ago, and to have been more frugal of my time, my most precious possession, when it was most valuable. But, though it is too late to spare when all is spent, yet must I conserve more carefully what remains, even though it be short and less valuable. Farewell. London, April 1, 1506.°

We have no right to question the genuineness of Erasmus' sentiments as expressed in this letter to his Prior, though they are far different in tone from those he was expressing at the same moment to his other correspondents. The Prior, however, was apparently influenced by them. to the extent that for the present he made no further effort to constrain him to return to the monastery. So Erasmus for a time breathed freely, and proceeded to enjoy the society of his English friends.

9
• Ibid., 189.

CHAPTER XV

LAURENTIUS VALLA: THE "ANNOTATIONES"

Erasmus had gone to England with increased reputation, due to the fact that since his last trip to that country he had published his Adagia, his Enchiridion, and still more recently his Annotations on Laurentius Valla, in which he first displayed his capacity for Scriptural exegesis. It is of this last work that we must now speak, since it shows the trend which his mind was taking, and the freedom which he assumed to treat theological subjects then illuminated and clarified by his newly acquired knowledge of Greek. In Valla he found a man entirely after his own heart, an elegant Latinist, a lover of the ancient civilizations, a scholar and an accomplished writer, wielding a trenchant pen, and possessing a fulminating diction. He had a taste for controversy which made him many enemies, as it has never failed to do in every age and society. Valla was born about 1415 and died the year before Erasmus was born, viz., 1465. We are not informed as to where or how he got his education, but that he received a thorough one we can have no doubt, for he is acclaimed by friend and foe one of the most learned men of the fifteenth century. He found that in the hands of the Schoolmen the Latin language had degenerated into a pedantic jargon, full of barbarisms and modern turns of phrase, according to the nationality of the person who happened to use it. Now, Valla was a precisian of the most punctilious brand, and to see his beloved Latin abused was enough to throw him into a passion. He was unsparing in his condemnation of such barbarism, and, as a consequence naturally to be expected, soon incurred the anger of the Schoolmen by the ridicule which he brought upon them. Hence criticism and contradiction were the principal occupations of his life, so much so that the hostility of his enemies at last made Rome too hot for him, and we next find him at Naples. Some blame his exit from the Eternal City on the Pope of that day, others with equal probability on the enemies which he had created for himself by his sharp tongue. Bayle quotes Paulus Jovius about him:

"Valla allowed himself great liberties, and was of a satirical and contentious disposition; for he would bitterly inveigh against the writings of others, and maintain violent disputes in learning against the ignorant, as if it were a matter of great importance. Several books of invectives and recriminations containing much learning and wit, are extant, wherein, whilst he endeavors to defend his wounded reputation, he seems to murder that of Facius, Panhormita, Pogius, and Raudensis." "

Bayle, Dict., Art. "Valla."

1

Then Bayle goes on to say:

If he had confined himself to criticise on the Humanists, he had escaped several reflexions published against him with a great deal of animosity, which he returned in the same stile; but he did not stop here, he carried his censures yet higher; he fell on the ecclesiastics, and spoke very boldly of certain things which they approved, and he disliked.'

These divines spoken of above were not slow to avenge themselves on him, and watched every opportunity for fleshing their grudge against him; so it is not to be wondered at that they searched his works narrowly for signs of heresy, that they might hale him before the Inquisition, and thus make that institution, which was intended for the extirpation of heresy, the instrument of their own petty spite. Spondanus, one of his contemporaries, tells us the following:

"Laurentius Valla, a man learned indeed for that age, but of a most virulent tongue for any age whatsoever, having advanced some heretical propositions, was brought before the Inquisitors, thrown into prison, and condemned to be burned as an Heretic, but by favor of King Alphonsus he escaped the execution of that sentence: however, having publickly abjured those propositions, he was privately whipped round the cloisters of the Jacobine monastery with his hands tied behind him."

Bayle continues:

Spondanus doth not cite the proposition which Laurentius Valla was obliged to retract; he doth not even say that they contained Heresies relating to the Trinity, Freewill, etc.; he saith only that one of Laurentius Valla's enemies insinuates it. This may make us think that Valla's doctrine was misrepresented by captious and malicious extracts, that it was charged as erroneous, though not really so. Observe, that notwithstanding all the mischievous efforts of the Neapolitan Inquisitors, he lived honorably at Rome; he there obtained permission to teach; he enjoyed a pension, and the Pope's esteem. This confirms the opinion of those who conjecture he was no Heretic, but that it was resolved he should be chastised for having censured the clergy."

We may fairly deduce from all this that Valla was a man of positive views, and accustomed to maintain them with scanty gentleness or suavity. This is a tactical error in controversy, for truth is always more effective when sprayed on than when delivered at high pressure. He had that weakness of many great men, pride of intellect, which makes them intolerant of the opinions and judgments of others. We may very well question the soundness of his judgment, and even entertain, as did the divines of his day, serious doubts as to his moral principles. For instance, in his essay De voluptate, he lays down the proposition that "My life is a greater good than that of all other people. * Idem.

2

Ibid.