Week 7 Reading Responses
Week 7 Reading Responses
Week 7 Reading Responses
the ideas around Northern Europe that preceded other respective reformations can generally
fall into the group in question. One of the features I found most fascinating was the common
desire for a vernacular translation of the Bible, i.e. a local translation that a more common
person could understand. This generally coincided with the spread of the printing press, and
the desire was to allow people to have a stronger understanding of the literature outside of
what was preached to them. To differing extents, the heretics of this period had opinions
about transubstantiation that did not coincide with the ideas of the Roman church.
Particularly, it was asserted by many groups, not least of which the two specifically named,
that eucharist did not necessarily have to revolve around the bread and wine (“communion
under both kinds”). Finally, it was common for there to be a disenfranchisement between the
heretics and the rule of the roman church, people detested the wealth of the church, its
positions on celibacy, and its overall role as a soul decision maker for theology.
2) Why is the rise in Humanism (in figures like Erasmus) significant to the history of
Christianity?
Humanism is significant in that it took the primary focus in culture, education, and teaching
from being almost completely about theism to having more of a focus on intellectual
understated role because people like to talk about humanism as purely secular. As
MacCulloch points out, Humanism began out of the desire to see Jesus’ ideas of human
dignity and happiness come to fruition. As it pertains to Erasmus, he seems to have had a
really important role in spreading ideas about free will as well as other ideas that had been
covered in ancient Greek texts. He was able to disperse these ideas because he was able to
learn Greek, and because he had an appreciation for studying the past and the desire to
motivate others to study the past and apply it to the modern day as well.
3) How does Erasmus’s vision of Christianity in the letter to the reader from the
Paraphrase on Matthew differ from what you know about medieval Christianity? How
does his ‘philosophy’ here compare to the excerpts from the Praise of Folly, a satire?
Erasmus’s vision of Christianity is particularly scathing in its account of the church, its
structure, and its treatment of laypeople. Often, the Middle Ages is talked about as if it is
some period where the roman catholic church had consistent hold over the people and control
of the scripture. Erasmus makes a well-founded call for poorer people, women, and children
to be allowed to read and discuss the scripture. Of course, this would be seen as a
revolutionary act and an act of heresy by the church to call for something so out of the
ordinary. In contrast, Folly is important as a satire because it imagines a rather make belief
notion of the church as a saviour and god as a saviour that elevates Christians above the rest
of the world. Folly is a criticism, and the work in the letter is much more grounded in the
Erasmus, through pamphilus, discussed some extremely controversial topics such as virginity
in marriage. Pamphilus holds the position that virginity might be broken in order to be more
appreciated and understood. People in marriage are not necessarily virtuous for staying chaste
according to the character, and it seems to me atleast that Erasmus was kind of… promoting
sexuality in marriage. Obviously, this would have been extremely controversial in the middle
ages church because sexuality was often seen as something that had to be controlled, and