Originally intended for private circulation, Desiderius Erasmus’ Praise of Folly examines the abuses and foolishness found among different social classes, with a particular focus on the church. This work serves as a calculated, critical portrayal of the church, repeatedly highlighting its shortcomings and employing satire. It becomes evident to the reader that Erasmus’ primary intention in writing this masterpiece was to encourage individuals to question the religious authority of the Romanists and reflect on their practices.
The Praise of Folly, written by Erasmus in 1509 during sixteenth century Europe, demonstrates his ability to employ literary and beautiful writing to effectively denounce the immorality and wickedness of humanity. The text, narrated from the perspective of Folly, a Greek goddess, presents a speech in which she celebrates herself. She claims that she is responsible for the beginning of all life and asserts her belief that she deserves the highest esteem.
The text highlights how throughout the entire book, the author aims to persuade the reader that certain qualities such as self-love, flattery, forgetfulness, idleness, pleasures, madness, sensuality, revelry, and dead sleep are virtues rather than flaws. The author cunningly convinces the reader that all acts of foolishness are actually wise. However, Erasmus’s true message in this book is that these so-called “virtues” contribute to the corruption and misconduct in the world, which ultimately leads to a disastrous outcome in the eyes of God.
Erasmus uses the voice of the goddess “Folly” to expose the social and moral faults of different classes of people, including the Scientists. He criticizes them for believing they are superior to others and teaches that they alone possess wisdom while the rest of us are mere shadows. Erasmus also challenges the idea that only the Pope has the ability to interpret the Holy Scripture, and he mocks the claim that the Pope possesses divine wisdom. According to Erasmus, the Pope and Romanists profess to know everything, yet they are ignorant of themselves and often miss obvious obstacles because of their lack of awareness or absent-mindedness.
Erasmus suggests that although he does not explicitly criticize the Pope, the Pope is regarded as a formidable human being enclosed in a crystal box, which is an inappropriate way to treat a Pope. Furthermore, Erasmus asserts that the Pope lacks true understanding of God’s expectations from his followers. Additionally, Erasmus queries why figures of religious authority such as Popes, Cardinals, and Bishops believe they possess the knowledge to address every existential question regarding human origins and destiny. It appears that these individuals are more preoccupied with their positions of power than fulfilling their religious obligations.
According to Erasmus in “The Praise of Folly” (Spanish Version, 67), religious authorities are quick to deny responsibility when it comes to acts of charity but become more attentive in finding ways to obtain money. Erasmus finds it troubling that these fortunate scientists can easily persuade people to believe their words. He urges the people of the church not to blindly accept everything told by these figures of authority as they have devalued Christ’s sacrifice. It is important to note that while Erasmus condemns the wickedness of these religious figures, he does not disapprove of Roman Catholic doctrine. Instead, he calls for a reformation of priestly ethics and behavior rather than reforming Roman theology.
As a Christian Humanist, Erasmus aimed for religious reform in the church by promoting educational and social change. He did not support a religious revolt as he believed it would lead to anarchy. Therefore, he did not take sides with either the Pope or Martin Luther, but instead chose to provoke individuals to question their faith in religious authority through his writings. This approach is evident in The Praise of Folly, where he indirectly criticizes the Romanists without directly speaking out against them.
The Reformation originated from a widespread yearning for spiritual fulfillment in various parts of Europe. Intellectual movements emerged, providing intellectual substance to the initial quest for God. This, consequently, led to the establishment of the Reformation and a lasting schism within the church. The Reformation persisted in places where the secular authorities supported it, but it could not endure in regions where suppression was the chosen approach. This era was characterized by a commitment to uniformity, adhering to the belief that a single political entity could not accommodate two different systems of faith or worship.
Erasmus lived during a time when many intellectuals were critical of different aspects of Christianity. The Praise of Folly reflects this, as it encourages rejecting the pope’s authority to establish new moral and behavioral systems. Erasmus, known as the “Prince of Humanists,” was a key figure in the Reformation period.
In my opinion, he is an incredibly intriguing and unforgettable historical figure, and a considerable number of individuals firmly believe in his exceptional intelligence, which is demonstrated through his work The Praise of Folly. This book contains historical and cultural references that unequivocally establish its origins in sixteenth century Europe. As previously mentioned, The Praise of Folly serves as a vehicle for Erasmus to convey his viewpoints through subtle suggestions and a satirical assault on the customs of the Catholic Church and prevalent superstitions. Its central theme revolves around the foolishness inherent in humanity.
Erasmus suggested that foolishness was the state that captivated people into doing wrong things, but he acknowledged one benefit of foolishness: the ability to speak the truth. In his work Praise of Folly, Erasmus utilized this freedom to remind readers that one cannot simultaneously serve both God and demons on the earth.
Furthermore, he discovered that the requirement for severity was indispensable in order to elucidate to a society profoundly tainted by secular preoccupations, that the principles of Christianity and the Holy Scriptures were presently overshadowed by avarice and ambition. When analyzing satire during the Renaissance, it is impossible to ignore studying the satire of Desiderius Erasmus and as you begin to grasp all of his satire, you cannot help but ponder what a person such as Erasmus of Rotterdam would perceive about today’s world, both politically and morally.
In our time, we need individuals like Erasmus who can speak out against the folly perpetuated by governments, churches, and other powerful organizations. Just as Erasmus did in his own time, these individuals should not hesitate to let the folly flow freely. If Erasmus were alive today, he would undoubtedly take pleasure in exercising his freedom of speech and exposing himself to the various modern-day follies that exist within the political and religious realms.
