Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Erasmus and Luther: the power of the pens
Click on the link below (or paste it into a browser)to read Luther's 95 Theses, and then write a post comparing it to the satire of Erasmus which we read in class. In particular, I want to know what you think of how the tone of the two texts differ. What would account for these differences? You can also access both documents on the cd that came with your text. Publish your posts be Wednesday October 10th.
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/web/ninetyfive.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Luther's 95 Theses are obviously much more formal than Erasmus' satire. Both pieces aimed to convey a point: the Catholic Church is corrupt, and the greed of the hierarchy is responsible for the corruption. Erasmus chose to poke fun at the Vatican, burying his message beneath humor. Luther is direct, condemning indulgences and the questionable behavior of church leaders in a serious way. Rather a lighter, entertaining dialogue between Pope Julius and St. Peter, Luther uses a list that cuts directly to the point in order to show that he is completely serious in his denunciation of the Church.
ReplyDeleteLuther was a lot bolder than Erasmus. Both men challenged the validity of the Catholic Churches hierarchy, however, Luther did it in a much more drastic way. Instead of burying his main points under humor in a language which only the top one percent could read, he spelled out his points in black and white in a public place where most of the monks where literate and where probably thinking the same things. Erasmus also poked fun, not so much at the church doctrine but more at the pope himself. He made fun of his lustful ways and money laundering more than the selling of indulgences or the denunciation of individualism.
ReplyDeleteThe 95 these by Luther differ both in subject and tone from the satire written by Erasmus. The satire was small in scope, and obviously quite jocular in tone. It deals with the misbehavior of one pope, as shown by the title "Julius excluded from Heaven." Luther's text is far more serious, and this is partly because of the scope of his piece. While Erasmus was poking fun at the behavior of one pope in particular, it was not an attack on the legitimacy of the papacy or its powers. Luther, on the other hand,is attacking the papacy and church on serious theological points, so his tone is far more serious to reflect this. Erasmus posed no threat to the Church with his lighthearted satire, while Luther meant to make a statement with his broad attack on the Catholic Church.
ReplyDeleteLuther was attempting to aim at the heart of the churchs corruption while he wrote his 95 thesis, where as Erasmus was siply poking fun at the corruptions of the class of socio-elitists that he belonged to. Luther was speaking towards a broader audiance as well, since few could read latin. Luther put his thesis into the language of his people so that his words could be better understood, whereas Erasmus wrote in the language spoken by the top tier of the population. Erasmus spoke softly in jokes, where as Luther aimed to make an impression with his condemning words.
ReplyDeleteMartin Luther's aim of writing the 95 Thesis was to criticize the church severely, whereas Erasmus aimed to make fun of the church officials. Also, Luther has a much more sincere and commanding tone that really makes his words sting when he says them. Erasmus' tone was much more lighter and easier then Luther because Erasmus was joking with the church. Since Erasmus was writing in Latin, only high up officials would see his letters. However, Luther wrote in German and tried to provoke the church and his followers with his words. Luther's tone is serious and commanding as compared to Erasmus who was more set on making jokes in his letters.
ReplyDeleteWhile the objective of these two documents was the same, Luther and Erasmus went about addressing the pitfalls of the Catholic Church in very different ways. Erasmus almost set forth a joking tone while criticizing the corruption and scandalous activity of the Church, as if he were a friend poking fun at a colleague. Luther went for a different, much bolder approach, listing 95 statements denoting Church activities. He uses language which tells its readers the Church does not possess the authority to do certain things, say certain things, and be certain things.
ReplyDeleteThe difference between these two documents is the reason and purpose for which they were written. Erasmus's document primary purpose was to poke fun at Pope Julius II's arrogance rather than be a critical analysis of the church. He wrote with humor and satire to convey his point because he was writing to the upper class who would understand his humor. Martin Luther on the other hand wrote the 95 theses very objectively because he was primarily trying to point out how his view of religion differed from that of church. He was very critical in the 95 theses because he needed to be in order to get his ideas across. Both men altered their writing style based on their purpose of their writing and the audience they were writing to.
ReplyDeleteBecause Luther was boldly protesting corrupt Church practices, he is very explicit in listing his grievances against the Church. This can be contrasted with Erasmus' satire, in which he illustrates the corruption of the papacy in a humurous manner. Erasmus is more subtle; he is not as condemning as Luther. Furthermore, as we discussed in class, Erasmus' piece was written in Latin, so few people read it, while Luther's theses were distributed in the vernacular, so his theses are a much more serious heretical offense.
ReplyDeleteThe difference in tone between Luther's 95 Theses and Erasmus's satire lies in the purpose for which they were writing. Luther was writing the theses in order to make a declaration of the Church's faults. He formally critizes the pope and the Catholic Church by writing established statements on where the Church is moving in the wrong direction. The purpose of Luther was to provoke some sort of reaction from his fellow Germans in which they would agree with his 95 Theses. Luther's tone is bold and determined. Erasmus's satire was written in Latin, and like we discussed in class, was meant to be read by other wealthy people of Europe's elite class. Its tone is comical and light hearted. It was not criticism to defy the Chruch, it was just criticism to give the wealthy class something to laugh at by making fun of the pope.
ReplyDeleteThe two texts differ as unlike Luther's strong condemnations Erasmus' work was written in a satirical manner and intended as such. Erasmus was simply making fun of the state of Church corruption while Luther's 95 theses were specific in their criticisms towards the Church. Luther's writings conveyed the urgency in addressing the widespread problems of the Church as opposed to the humorous Erasmus. Erasmus simply wanted to obtain a few laughs amongst those who could read Latin where as Luther attempted to expose the issues amongst the Church to an entire population.
ReplyDeleteErasmus' work is a satire a Pope Julius II "The Warrior Pope". The work is about Julius at the gates of heaven trying to get in but St. Peter won't let him. Peter says how Julius had not been a good man on earth becuase he did not follow the teachings of Jesus. Peter says that the power or positon of the pope means nothing but faith matters. The joke is when Juius says he will return with an army to conquer heaven, becuase he had tried to take over Italy. This polical satire was written in Latin and was intended only for the wealthy and educated. Because it was written in Latin and many people would not be able to read it, it was seen as a threat to Church. Also becuase of Erasmus' position as a well known humanist would have made it hard for the Church to do anything about him. Martin Luther's 95 Theses however was a direct attack on the instition of the Catholic Church itself. In it he attacks many teachings and pratices of Church such as: indulences, the power of pope, and the sacramnets. Luther's work was directed toward a larger audiance and was created for the purpose of exposing the Catholic Church as a corrupt instition.
ReplyDeleteAlthough in each work there is indeed criticism,given their contexts, it is evident that they both contrast in their intent. Esmarus was always a humanist who loved to criticize his contemporaries. But similar to many of today's "humanists" like Steven Colbert, Esmarus was only being sarcastic. He had meant for his writing to only as a center of a knee-slapping and comical time. On the other hand, Martin Luther had legitimate criticisms of the Roman Catholic Church. He disagreed with several different aspects of the Catholic doctrines and papal power. In fact, he even taught against them when he was a professor. So when he had written the 95 Theses, it was with the utmost seriousness.
ReplyDeleteThe two texts both have the same goal, to criticize the presence of corruption in the Catholic Church. However, Erasmus and Martin Luther had two very different purposes when writing the documents. Erasmus's writing was very satirical, and was not meant to be a serious, public condemnation against the Church. Since most could not read at the time, Erasmus's work was only read by the clergy and was taken as simply a joke, being well-received. In contrast, Luther's theses were meant to directly attack Church practices, and were meant to be spread to the general public. Instead of satire, Luther looked to intensely criticize the Church. Although the documents had similarities in that they both criticized the Church, the intent of the authors was quite different.
ReplyDeleteThe 95 Theses by Martin Luther offer a stark contrast to the satires written by the likes of Erasmus. In both of these scholars' works, there is a criticism of the Pope and the clergy, but the tone of the works are very different. Erasmus' criticisms of the Pope are composed in sort of a joking tone, and one that can certainly get some laughs out of readers. Luther's 95 Theses, however, are Luther's honest opinions about what he thinks is a very serious issue. Unlike Erasmus' satire, Martin Luther uses many of his 95 Theses to talk about the idea of purgatory, and how he is stongly agaisnt the sale of indulgences. Erasmus, on the other hand, jokes about the Pope's elaborate parties and his insatiable need for luxury. Because of Erasmus' entertainment value, he was more highly regarded in Europe than Luther, who was strongly critcized by the staunch Catholics in Europe. These are the ways in which the tone differs in both of these famous works.
ReplyDeleteLuther's theses boldly attacked the Church and criticized the practice of selling indulgences as well as the Pope himself. Erasmus also criticized the Church, but he used satire to make his message more appealing to his audiance, which included Church officials. Even though Erasmus attacks the Church, he does so indirectly and his use of humor allows the Pope and other officials to potentially believe that he is only kidding. When Luthor publicly and boldly condemns the Church and its practices, there is no way the papacy can make it seem like he wasn't serious. Erasmus feared the potential wrath of the church, so he was careful to use humor to mask his true opinions. Luthor wanted the Church to notice him, so he used harsh language with a confrontational tone that was sure to draw attention to himself.
ReplyDeleteClearly, the major difference between the two men's work was the language in which it was written. Erasmus wrote in Latin, meaning only few educated men could read his satiric work, such as the pope himself and the bishops that worked for him. Erasmus' work was playful and comical, and was accurate because Erasmus knew many of the people that worked in the Vatican. Luther wrote in German, meaning many common people could read his work that would not have been able to read it had it been published in Latin. His tone is bitter and serious. Erasmus points to social problems while Luther points more towards religious flaws. Eramus' tone is not corrective, where Luther's is radical and serious. Also, Erasmus' work does not call for change the way Luther's does, which digs deeper into the works and teachings of the Church than the comical meeting of the Pope and Peter at the gates.
ReplyDelete