Readers of Discourse on Free Will, a written debate between Martin Luther and Desiderius Erasmus, will find one of the early essential philosophical divisions of the Roman Catholic Church. These two theologians debate the heart of Luther's fundamental differences over church doctrine. Never mind issues like indulgences and purgatory (indeed Luther thanks Erasmus for not discussing such "trifles") because Luther's primary argument concerned justification by faith through the grace of God. The book compiled here, edited by Ernst Winter, is a glimpse into the minds of these two influential men.

Winter's editing is a bit suspect, as Erasmus enjoys the first 94 pages while Luther receives only the final 44, but this really gives Erasmus more time to make a fool of himself. Erasmus wonders around raising many points and attempts to connect all into his free will argument, but it is not until his conclusion that he begins to make his point. In section 48, Erasmus confuses free will with grace, on page 56 he refers to a chamber pot to make his point. He makes a weak argument until his conclusion, which takes on the appearance of a lawyer closing his case. Ultimately though, one must consider this: Rotterdam has never been known for its scholars; Erasmus is no exception.

But this is not to say Luther is the "winner" here. The book is somewhat akin to a pre-Reformation version of "Grumpy Old Men." The debate gets personal at times. In two instances Luther refers to Erasmus as "stupid" and Erasmus states Luther is "without reason." This makes for a more interesting read but also shows the limits of each man's patience. This book may not be for everyone, but those desiring to know more about the debate of the Catholic Church will find it has much to offer. THere clearly are two different styles here. Erasmus offers hope for all, true to the elements of Humanism, while Luther's effort is not for the faint of heart. Either way, the reader will be richer for the effort.

Desiderius Erasmus and Martin Luther's theological polemic and "Discourse on Free Will" is a wonderful source to understand the thought that classified, diversified, and divided the plain between the classical and orthodox, and the novel and heretical. These view points changed the face of an age - from common belief and good conduct, to individualism and good belief ...with this book you may decide a position for yourself.

Luther once said that the Catholic Church stands or falls on the question of justification and free will: salvation by faith alone, or must the human soul respond? Get a first-hand peek at what Luther thought of the Catholic Church's teachings, and how Erasmus, a Catholic bishop, replied. Don't think you understand the Reformation or the "protest" inherent in Protestantism until you read this book. This is Luther at his fist-pounding best; but Erasmus is sophisticated, irenic, and penetrating. The key question is: who was right? If you're a Christian, don't decide until you've read this cover to cover.

Erasmus was fascinated by proverbs and this book highlights over 80 proverb essays of the more than 4,000 that Erasmus collected and commented on. Typically each is accompanied with his comments, which are sometimes in a few lines and sometimes in full-scale essays. They display his wit and elegance, along with bursts of satire alternating with serious views. The proverbs when published was kind of a « top seller » of Europe at the time.

This selection by Dr. William Barker emphasizes Erasmus' skill in explaining the proverbs, shows how he made his book, and demonstrates the way in which many of the proverbs moved into the English language. The text is illustrated with images by Brueghel and Holbein and examples of proverb use from emblem books.

Of the 80 proverb essays, some are masterpieces of social criticism (War is sweet to those who have never tried it), others provide scholarly explanations of philosophical ideas or gestures and customs (Thumbs up). Many of the proverbs have passed into modern usage (Know thyself, To give someone the "finger", Well begun is half done), some even retaining their Latin form (Deus ex machina). And a few, it turns out, were created by Erasmus himself through his occasional misinterpretation of the ancient languages (Pandora's box, To call a spade a spade).

Above all the book is extremely readable and Professor Barkers comments are thoroughly enjoyable. It is the kind of book you can dip into now and then for some quick insights or amusement.

It is hard to believe that a compilation of over 4,000 adages from
Greek and Latin could ever be a bestseller, but that is what happened
five hundred years ago when Erasmus started publishing his editions of
adages. Erasmus is more famous for _Praise of Folly_ (1511) which is
still funny and represents a pinnacle of sly wit and subversive
erudition. His compilation of adages, however, was his most popular
work in his own time. You can still find the full edition all of
them, in six volumes, but now there is a one volume selection, _The
Adages of Erasmus_ (University of Toronto Press), selected by William
Barker. As an introduction to renaissance thinking and to an
astonishingly well-read and retentive mind, this edition of the
_Adages_ is excellent, but it is also a reminder to us moderns of how
deeply the roots of learning go back into the past.

The _Adages_
became influential just as adages themselves are to our way of
thinking. Proof that this particular collection continues to
influence us comes most pointedly from a couple of mistakes that
Erasmus made. In his discussion of "He calls figs figs, a spade a
spade," Erasmus took the Greek "skaptein" meaning "to
dig" as the source of "scapha;" he thought it was a spade,
but it actually is a small dugout boat, or skiff. The meaning of the
proverb is unchanged; Erasmus explains, "It suits a man who speaks
the truth in a simple and countrified style, who tells of things as
they are, and does not wrap them up in ornamental verbiage." But
ever since Erasmus, no one has said "to call a skiff a skiff."
Time and again, this collection points out very familiar ideas which
were first voiced thousands of years ago; Erasmus discusses "To
leave no stone unturned," "Know thyself," "The cart before
the horse," and many more which, except for translation, are
entirely the same as they were for the ancients. To read the _Adages_
is to find comfort in this sort of scholarly stability. In addition,
there are a good many expressions here, some crude, which didn't make
it to modern times, but perhaps should have. Erasmus, admitting
"the line is too obscene to give much pleasure to the
translator," reflects on "In canis podicem inspicere," from
Aristophanes: "I told him to go and look into a dog's anus."

Many of the adages here show a citation and a very brief
explanation, but those who wish weightier matter will enjoy reading
the digressions. Sometimes Erasmus apologizes for going far from his
source proverb, but by such means he gives us his ideas on the proper
upbringing of princes, his own work in scholarly explication, or the
futility of war. It is clear that he delights in pointing out to his
contemporaries the continuation of learning from the ancients and the
need to adopt the lessons to his own times. This large and attractive
summary of his thought in _Adages_ is just right for those who wish to
take the lessons into our own.

Why are Christians waging war against each other?
The complaint of peace: I belong to the most stupid cattle rather than to the humans.
Bitter is his comment on the Lord's Prayer.
It is a shame for humanity that this text is still burning topical.

Bainton's classic is still a great pick for the scholar, pastor or layman interested in his spiritual heritage. Erasmus was perhaps only a little less well known than Luther during the Reformation. While he ultimately maintained a semblance of loyalty to the Roman church, he was always a compatriot at heart with Luther and his movement. Bainton presents the facts with the touch of a master, weaving together the various strands of Erasmus life -- linguist, satirist, theologian, classicist -- into a coherent picture that allows the reader to come away feeling as if he had spent a day with the great humanist himself.

It would be best to have a rough idea of Reformation history under your belt before reading Bainton. He takes for granted a familiarity with the general events and characters of the 16th century.

Two complaints: First, Bainton fails to devote enough attention to the content of the theological debates (especially Luther vs. Erasmus) in which Erasmus was continually embroiled. Second, the extensive quotations throughout the book often seemed extraneous.

While not as compelling as Bainton's _Here I Stand_, _Erasmus of Christendom_ is still a standard work in Erasmus studies and a worthwhile read for those interested in Church History.

This book challenges much of the poly-genesis consensus regarding the origins of the Anabaptist or Wiedertaufer movement. It focuses primarily on the intellectual origins of the movement and points to Erasmus as the progenitor of the Anabaptists' teaching on baptism. Friesen makes the fascinating claim that Erasmus' argument, which proposed using the Great Commission as the paradigm for understanding all other baptismal passages, did not occur before Erasmsus and is utilized by all would be Anabaptists. He also uses this argument to separate Anabaptists proper from their more controversial contempories like the Zwickau prophets whom he says were influenced by Luther and not Erasmus. I think that Friesen offers a convincing argument and helps counteract Harold Bender's view that Erasmus had little to do with the Anabaptist movement. Without a doubt, Friesen has discovered a cave of inquiry which needs to be explored thoroughly for a better understanding of why there was ever a group called Anabaptists.

Folly's father is Ploutos (wealth) who regulates all public and private affairs of mankind (war, peace, military power, justice, assemblies, marriages, treaties, laws, art and science, humour and earnestness...).
This book is full of humour, occasionally pessimistic and sometimes a cynical diatribe against mankind. His principal targets: the Roman Catholic Church, his fellow countrymen, the Dutch, and women. Erasmus was a misogynist.
This book is still not old-fashioned and didn't loose his vitriolic style. By reading it, I still learned a lot about human foolish behaviour.
I recommend the short but impressive work by Stefan Zweig on Erasmus for an appraisal of his public and private life.

You cannot beat this edition, prepared in the early darkness of WW II, for depth, humor, and readability. An outstanding look at the most courageous Renaissance man imaginable.

This is a funny and inteligent choice. Praise of Folly may make us think much more than we might -- if that is possible -- imagine.

This edition has "some" of Erasmus' most influential works; namely, "The Praise of Folly", the political "Complaint for Peace", "Forewords to the Latin New Testament", "Julius Excluded from Heaven", the "Colloquis", and excerpts from his finest letters. These works are selected more to understand the humanistic side of Erasmus rather than the scholarly doctrinaire who labored for the peace of christendom. With these selections - entailed by fotenotes, the editor's prefaces, and critcical commentaries - this edition will invariably enhance a more intimate impression of the mind of Erasmus at the dawn of the reformation.

I managed to stumble across Erasmus while reading William Manchester's "A World Lit Only By Fire", and was beyond intrigued by such a character as described that I had never even heard about. Of course, Erasmus had been mentioned in my presence often, but never in a direct context. So I pick up this book, hoping to find out what the deal was and what I was missing.

My entire view of the middle ages changed practically overnight. Do not miss the fact, people: Erasmus was THE deal. Erasmus makes Luther look like a limp little hothead. Erasmus is Jim Carrey to Voltaire's Carrot Top. Erasmus drows the candle of Aristophanes with a roaring torch. The ultimate critic, the ultimate wit, and the ultimate reason in an age of insanity. Without this fantastic book I may have passed a second 18 years without Erasmus as an inspiration. The pure genius and subtlety of truly the most underappreciated scholar of all time is laid out glowingly. Why did I waste my time with "Mandrake" and "Candide" when "In Praise of Folly" does the same job a thousand times better? Why on earth do we pay attention to Martin Luther, the most incompetant and ridiculous "reformer" of all time, when Erasmus was doing everything twice as good at exactly the same time?

Get this book, people. Understand Erasmus and understand a wisdom that defied an age of stupidity.

As a social critique of Enlgish and European society, this book is very effective. It is also beautifully written. But it should not be read as the depiction of what society should be like. Thomas More, a wise and brave man executed by orders of Henry VIII, knew that Utopia shouldn't be taken very seriously, and that is exactly why he used the word Utopia to name his famous island. Utopia, in latin, means "in no place", that what can not exist. The problem is that this simple fact was not understood by many. And so, "utopianism" was born. The preposterous belief that there is a universal and definitive form of organization for human societies led to disasters like Nazism and Communism. By organizing everything perfectly (according to who?), these systems become the negation of the very essence of the human being: its innate imperfection and its need to be constantly changing, always on the move. It is simply impossible that some political, economic and social system resolves once and for all the troubles of humanity. Problems are exactly what make humans progress and reform constantly. Besides, the State has proven indispensable for survival, but also limited in what it can accomplish (in Utopia, the State provides everything for everybody). Stagnant societies degenerate and disappear, or remain to live from the charity of dynamic societies. Closed, perennial social systems, simply don't work: there is abundant proof in history, ancient or recent. "Utopia" is an excellent account of human shortcomings and a good tale, but it is not, nor was intended to be, a recipe with solutions for the world. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell have shown us what might happen in a supposed Utopia. The Communist world was worse. And Anthony Burgess clearly shows us in "A Clockwork Orange", that in "perfect" societies, the only way to practice freedom is violence. Let's not be perfect.

Utopia is a classic masterpiece that conveys More's vivid imagination of the Island of Utopia. Although most of the characters are fictional, it is intriguing to learn about the true values of European societies during the 16th century, when More actually wrote the book (although many scholars believe that the exact year was 1515). Truthfully, the book is quite easy to understand. All More tries to do is convey his own views of how society should be through Raphael. Moreover, the use of imagery in Book I is quite fascinating, including the constant references to Roman and Greek myths and beliefs. It is also quite remarkable to see that the story begins to be more and more interesting after More and Giles come back from dinner. To make a long story short, I think it is a great book because of the actual time it was written in since most pieces of literature written at that time were either lost or destroyed.

As a social critique this book is very effective with answers to many arguments. Thomas More is a wise, brave and educated man who was executed by orders of Henry VIII, and wrote Utopia more as an explanation of why society needed to be far from perfect in order to be enjoyable. Utopia, meaning in Latin "in no place", was written entirely in satire, and many have said that it was a great source of entertainment for the more educated as they watched those less educated argue on the side of a Utopian state while quoting Moore, and having never seen the satire present while reading. Mr. Moore's Utopia touches on every aspect of the human existance as it would be experienced if we prescribed to this way of life. I found many of his discriptions colorful, and commonly found myself of the verge of anger before realizing that Mr. Morre was more often than not simply playing the devil's advocate.

This was very enjoyable for me. I would recommend that everyone take a risk and read this one.

Granted this is pretty dry reading. Erasmus may not be the greatest writer. This does make for a turgid evening if one plans or desires to read it from cover to cover in one sitting. That said, Erasmus rode (if not found himself starting) the beginning wave of the great reformation. In his writings (which bear a not so slight foreshadowing to the great C.S. Lewis) Erasmus gives hope for all of us sinners in the guise of wit. An important addition to any library of classical literature.

Sorry, I tried several times to read this book. I hunted for passages that might interest me. Unfortunately, all I found was [the author] blowing his own horn. But then fantasy and science is about all that interests me. I'm sure someone with a historical bent would find this tale exhilarating.

To say the book has less than perfect unity in tone, as was written in the introduction, pg xv, is an understatement. The reader is never sure whether it is Folly or Erasmus who is talking. Perhaps for the goddess of Folly, contradictions and inconsistencies are the very follies desired - how are we mortals to tell?

And that is what we have here - all the inconsistencies, as, for example, mentioned in pages xiv-xv of the introduction again, that Erasmus wrote with the learned sophistry he denied schoolmen, philosophers, courtiers, theologians and monks. It's almost like Lao-Tzu and his Tao-Te Ching which includes the famous "The name that can be named is not the eternal name; the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao," only to have a later poet, Po Chi-Yi, quip about the 10,000 word effort to say what cannot be said in the first place. Yes, he did say at the end that 'I hate an audience that won't forget,' but that's not a courtesy he proffered to his opponents, of whom the criticism by Erasmus seems caviling, carping and nitpicking. He should have emulated his inpiration, Lucian with his 'philosophers for sale,' and made points simple like that here. It would be unfair, though tempting, to think that Erasmus took Quitillian to heart (pg. 81, 'what can't be refuted can often be parried in laughter') and disguised his voice in silly chaos for what has not been thought out cogently.

So, one is not quite sure whether wasting away a life in idleness, corruption or avarice as priests, bishops and monks are wont to do is the same kind of folly as the folly that comes from the innocence of the simple minded people or children, since Erasmus never quite made it crystal clear. Do we praise folly here but condemn it otherwise - without unity of tone and consistency of the vantage point of the writer, the whole thing just becomes a mess of confusion.

What Erasmus wanted to say does deserve our attention, but one wishes that he could have done it in a more fluid style and without all that pretentious classical references, for unlike Lucian, he lived not in that period. And certainly it could be better organized into chapters and sections, and used some editing to eliminate the endless repetitions, ensure consistency and unity of tone. Casson's 'Selected Satires of Lucian' is a much better read and is highly recommended over this one.

A book written by a man who has become very well aquainted with the subject matter. He allows the facts to present the subject with little fanfare or extra fluff. The bad is presented along with the good, and with praise when praise is warranted, and with no apologies when other authors have made excuses. All within the context of the times.

This book is excellent for gaining a cursory understanding of Erasmus, some of his works ,and various elements that helped him develop his ideas. Tracy has done a good job of trying to walk the middle ground and has done an admirable job of laying the details down without trying to interpret them too much. An excellent starting point for those who wish to study Erasmus.