Controversies

Controversies: Apologia ad Fabrum / Appendix de scriptis Clithovei / Dilutio / Responsio ad disputationem de divortio, Volume 83

edited by Guy Bedouelle
Volume: 83
Copyright Date: 1998
Pages: 392
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3138/9781442673410
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    Controversies
    Book Description:

    In these four responses to his critics, Erasmus discusses popular concerns such as the relations between the sexes, celibacy, marriage, divorce, and how to live a good life.

    eISBN: 978-1-4426-7341-0
    Subjects: History

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-vi)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. vii-x)
  3. Introduction
    (pp. xi-lviii)
    Guy Bedouelle

    ‘It would be preferable to devote our energies to resolving our differences rather than to providing seed-ground for new disagreements through biased inquiries.’ Erasmus made this appeal for dialogue with his colleagues, both humanists and theologians, in the last lines of hisAppendixwritten to answer the criticisms of Josse Clichtove. It has a rather paradoxical ring, if one considers the 1444 quarto pages of the ninth volume of hisOpera omnia(Froben 1540)¹ containing the texts that Erasmus wrote to deal with his various critics – and in which, whatever he says, he took a certain amount of pleasure.²...

  4. APOLOGY AGAINST JACQUES LEFÈVRE D’ÉTAPLES Apologia ad Iacobum Fabrum Stapulensem
    (pp. 1-108)

    The controversy between Erasmus and the Parisian humanist Jacques Lefèvre d’Etaples, which culminated in the publication of theApologia ad lacobum Fabrum Stapulensem, had its origin in a critical comment by Erasmus on Lefèvre’s interpretation of St Paul’s reference to Psalm 8:6 in the Epistle to the Hebrews 2:7. At issue was whether the meaning should be ‘You have made him a little lower than God,’ as Lefèvre contended, or ‘You have made him a little lower than the angels,’ as Erasmus maintained. Lefèvre first declared his view in his annotation on Psalm 8:6 in hisQuincuplex psalteriumof 1509,...

  5. AN APPENDIX ON THE WRITINGS OF JOSSE CLICHTOVE REFUTATION OF THE ACCUSATIONS OF JOSSE CLICHTOVE AGAINST THE SUASORIA OF DESIDERIUS ERASMUS OF ROTTERDAM IN PRAISE OF MARRIAGE Appendix de scriptis Clithovei Dilutio eorum quae lodocus Clithoveus scripsit adversus dedamationem suasoriam matrimonii
    (pp. 109-115)

    TheAppendix on the Writings of josse Clichtovewas appended to theSupputatio calumniarum Natalis Bedae, published in August 1526, together with another appendix in answer to Pierre Cousturier’sAntapologia, apology to an apology. They are prefaced by a letter to the faculty of the University of Paris (Allen Ep 1664) dated 6 February 1526. It is evident that theAppendixwas meant only as a temporary reply to the accusations made by Clichtove in hisPropugnaculum ecclesiae adversus Lutheranos, and it is rather subdued in tone.¹

    In 1531, after a long sustained barrage, the University of Paris unleashed its...

  6. REFUTATION OF THE ACCUSATIONS OF JOSSE CLICHTOVE AGAINST THE SUASORIA OF DESIDERIUS ERASMUS OF ROTTERDAM IN PRAISE OF MARRIAGE
    (pp. 116-148)

    I have finally read through Josse Clichtove’s attack in the second book of hisPropugnaculum¹ against myDeclamation in Praise of Marriage. But his earnest attempt to do battle with a fictitious theme, using the testimony of the Scriptures and the Fathers and decrees of the church, almost provoked me to laughter. It was as if I had before my eyes a veteran soldier in full battle array exerting all his strength to fight with shadows, regaling his audience with an amusing spectacle of shadow-boxing. Nevertheless I admired his spirit, inflamed, as it appears, with an extraordinary love of chastity.²...

  7. THE REPLY OF ERASMUS TO THE DISPUTATION OF A CERTAIN PHIMOSTOMUS ON DIVORCE Responsio ad disputationem cuiusdam Phimostomi de divortio
    (pp. 149-178)

    In 1532 Johann Dietenberger published an attack on the doctrines of the reformers entitledPhimostomus scripturariorum, ‘A Bridle for the Scripturalists.’¹ To this he appended a ‘special treatise’ on the subject of divorce.² He had been working on this for some time, ever since he had discussed the subject with Valentin von Tetleben, the archbishop of Mainz. Tetleben had shown some sympathy for the view of Erasmus that the laws governing divorce might be relaxed, given certain circumstances.³ Erasmus had argued this point in a lengthy excursus on 1 Corinthians 7:39: ‘The wife is bound by the law as long...

  8. WORKS FREQUENTLY CITED
    (pp. 180-181)
  9. SHORT-TITLE FORMS FOR ERASMUS’ WORKS
    (pp. 182-186)
  10. Index
    (pp. 187-199)
  11. Back Matter
    (pp. 200-200)