18 ERASMUS January supremacy had been clearly raised by the controversies with Hutten and Luther, when Erasmus had given his opinion on the same side as More, and when the Lutheran movement was fairly under way, the first large edition of the Familiar Colloquies appeared (1522).^ The point of view shown in them is the same as Erasmus had ah-eady taken, and the publication at that precise time is proof enough that Erasmus had little of the timidity so often ascribed to him. Unflinching love of truth, together with a deep hatred of violence, which he held contrary to the law of Christ, were his great characteristics. But he had a mind sin- gularly detached, and thus his attitude pleased neither side. A detached mind, like a detached lady, is an extremely awkward travelling companion, and for a monk seemed to verge upon the improper. On 14 September 1523 Adrian VI died. The character of his successor, Clement VII, sent by Erasmus to Christopher, the reforming bishop of Basle, is significant. He expected that the emperor and cardinals would help the new pope to re-establish the now shrunken power of the papacy. Then his successor, who must in the course of things follow soon, would manage things as he pleased. The next year, while Erasmus was suffering from iUness and the attacks of his widely-spread foes, Tunstall and friends at Rome urged him to write against Luther, whom even so late as 1527 he described to Albert of Carpi as *a good man divinely sent ', and at last (1524) he does so. But the point he chooses for attack is to be noted. He wrote upon Free-will. The choice of this topic is sometimes explained by saying that Erasmus deliberately picked upon an admittedly minor point because, while his real sympathies were with Luther, he yet feared to take his side although he would not act against him. He made a demonstration, it is said, with as little violence to his own principles as possible. But, after all, this very point was an essential part of the Erasmian theology .^ Mr. Seebohm has already dealt with the matter and shown as much. Luther to the end was scholastic in his methods, although he owed more to Erfurt with its traditions of scriptural study ^ than is often supposed. Erasmus, on the other hand, postulated the free and full development of the individual, trained and disciplined, as the very foundation of theology. Hence his choice of a subject
- A small edition had appeared in 1519, but this was much larger. See Drummond,
ii. 151.
- It was also more fundamental with Luther than is sometimes thought. See
Grisar, Luther, i. 43 f. and 117 f. (Eng. translation). » For these traditions see Albert, Matthias Doering (Stuttgart, 1892), p. 17 ; N. Paulus, Der Augustincr Bartholomdua Ariioldi mn Usingen (Strassbnrg, 1893), p. 5, n. 2 ; also Ullmann, Reformers before the Reformation, i. 218 f.
