Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g5fl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-31T02:27:09.373Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kant and Erasmus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2009

E. C. Galbraith
E. C. Galbraith
Affiliation:
King's CollegeCambridge CB2 1ST
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a previous paper I have argued against the assumption made by much German literature at the beginning of the twentieth century, that Luther is the religious forerunner of Kant. Even though it is the Lutheran mythology that Kant is demythologizing, Luther still cannot be considered as the religious forerunner of Kant. There are two main reasons for this. First, Kant has an entirely different conception of the religious life in terms of freewill and salvation. Kant affirms freewill, Luther denies it. Kant considers good works as a prerequisite to salvation, Luther rules outworks as playing any part in the quest for salvation, since justification is by faith alone. Secondly, Kant's view of evil and human nature in general is far removed from the Lutheran conception of human depravity. Luther claims that human beings are totally corrupt, and in need of God's grace in order to become good. Kant argues that although human beings have a disposition towards evil, their underlying nature is good.

Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , January 1993 , pp. 191 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Luther und Melanchthon, ed. Vajta, Vilmos, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Göttingen, 1961, p. 195Google Scholar.

2 Erasmus' De Libero Arbitrio (The Freedom of the Will) in: Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation, translated and edited by Rupp, E. Gordon, and Marlow, A. N., p. 47Google Scholar.

3 Kant, Immanuel, Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone, translation by Greene, T. M. and Hudson, H. Hoyt, Harper and Row, London, 1960Google Scholar; Hereafter to be referred to as Religion Book 1 General Observation, p. 47, Book 3 VII.

4 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Freewill and Salvation’, p. 50.

5 Kadowaki, Takuji Das Radikal Böse bei Kant. Dissertation, Bonn 1960Google Scholar. My translation: ‘Wenn der Mensch in der Willkür nicht frei wäre, wie könnte er böse sein?’ p. 26.

6 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, p. 92.

7 Ibid. p. 63, cf. Romans 7:18, Religion Book 1, II, p. 25.

8 Religion, Book 1, III, p. 32.

9 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, pp. 73, 81, cf. Philippians 2:12.

10 Religion Book 2, section 1, c. p. 62, cf. Philippians 2:12.

11 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, p. 79.

12 Religion Book III, Division One, Vii, p. 108.

13 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’ p. 73.

14 Wood, A. W., Kant's Moral Religion, Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, 1970; pp. 240–248Google Scholar.

15 See Kant, Immanuel, The Conflict of the Faculties, translation and introduction by Gregor, M. J., 1979, Abaris Books, Inc. N.Y., pp. 81–83Google Scholar.

16 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, pp. 49, 52.

17 Ibid. pp. 52–66, 84.

18 See Religion Book III, Division One, Vii.

19 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’ p. 85.

20 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Freewill and Salvation, introduction, p. 15.

21 Religion Book 1, General Observation, p. 47.

22 Bainton, Roland H., Erasmus of Christendom, N.Y.: Charles Scribners Sons, 1969, pp. 187, 188, 190Google Scholar.

23 Luther and Erasmus: Freewill and Salvation, Introduction, p. 8.

24 See Kant, Immanuel, Lectures on Philosophical Theology, translation by Wood, Allen W., Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, 1978, p. 158Google Scholar.

25 Luther Erasmus and the Reformation: A Catholic Protestant Reappraisal, Ed. Olin, John C., Smart, James D., McNally, Robert E., Fordham University Press, New York, 1969, p. 108Google Scholar.

26 Luther and Erasmus: Freewill and Salvation, Introduction, p. 9.

27 Erasmus Symposium of 1971, Ed. DeMolen, Richard L.Twayne Publishers New YorkGoogle Scholar. DeMolen, . ‘Erasmus the Humanist’, James D. Tracy, p. 29Google Scholar.

28 Luther, Erasmus and the Reformation — A Catholic Protestant Reappraisal.

29 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, p. 48.

30 Immanual Kant-Eine Biographie, 1985, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, N.Y.Google Scholar My translation: ‘Der Mensch steht am “Scheideweg”; er hat nur die Wahl, dem “Gesetz Gehör zu geben” oder es zu übertreten, die Wahl zwischen Gut und Böse’.

31 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, p. 49.

32 Religion, Book 1, III, p. 34.

33 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, p. 75.

34 See the section on moral conversion in The Conflict of the Faculties, beginning on p97.

35 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’ p. 49.

36 Wood, A. W., Kant's Moral Religion, pp. 240–244Google Scholar.

37 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’ p. 49.

38 Religion, Book 1, III, p. 32.

39 ‘Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation’, p. 79.

40 Religion, Book 1, General Observations, pp. 40–42.

41 Letter to Maarten van Dorp, May 1515, translated by Olinin, John C.: Desiderius Erasmus: Christian Humanism and The Reformation, N.Y. 1965, pp. 57, 78Google Scholar.

42 Ibid. p. 60.

43 Phillips, Margaret Mann: The Adages of Erasmus: A Study with Translations, Cambridge University Press, 1964Google Scholar.

44 See Religion Book 4.

45 Erasmus Symposium of 1971, p. 23.

46 Ibid., p. 40.

47 Enchiridion, Ed. and transl. Himelick, R., Indiana University Press 1963, p. xviGoogle Scholar.

48 The Adages of Erasmus, p. 346.

49 Enchiridion, p. 11.

50 Cf. Palmquist, Stephen ‘Faith as the Key to the Justification of Transcendental Reflection’. The Heythrop Journal. XXV (1984)Google Scholar.

51 Desiderius Erasmus: Christian Humanism and The Reformation, p. 90.

52 Enchiridon, p. 197, cf. DeMolen, Richard L., The Spirituality of Erasmus of Rotterdam, De Graaf Publishers, the Haag 1987Google Scholar; p. 176.

53 See The Conflict of the Faculties, pp. 87, 121.

54 The Education of a Christian Prince, 1516, translated and edited by Born, Lester K., New York: Columbia University Press, 1963, p. 153Google Scholar.

55 Religion Book 4, General Obervation, p. 180.

56 Ibid., Book 4, Part 1, section two, p. 155.

57 Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation, p. 38.

58 Religion, Book 1. General Observation, p. 47, Book 4, pps. 133–138.

59 The Conflict of the Faculties, First Part, Appendix.

60 Enchiridion, p. xvi.

61 Ibid., p. 66.

62 Ibid., p. 47.

63 The Spirituality of Erasmus of Rotterdam, p. 123.

64 Ibid., p. 81.

65 Enchiridion, p. 65.

66 See Immanuel Kant, Lectures on Philosophical Theology, translation Wood, A. W. and Clark, G. M.; Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London, 1978; p. 160Google Scholar.

67 Erasmus Symposium, of 1971, p. 40.

68 The Conflict of the Faculties, p. 115.

69 Erasmus Symposium, of 1971, p. 41.

70 The Conflict of the Faculties, pp. 115, 117–118.

71 Enchiridion, p. 180.

72 Cf. Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, translated by Paton, H. J., Hutchinson and Co. Ltd., London, 1972 editionGoogle Scholar.

73 The Spirituality of Erasmus, pp. 174–175.

74 Life and Letters of Erasmus, Longmans and Green & Co., London and Bombay, 1899, p. 6Google Scholar.

75 Erasmus Symposium of 1971 p. 24.

76 Phillips, M. M., Erasmus and The Northern Renaissance, N.Y.: Collier Books, 1965, p. 11Google Scholar.

77 Erasmus: A Study of his Life, Ideals and Place in History, N.Y.: Harper and Brothers, 1923, p. 325Google Scholar.

78 Luther, Erasmus and the Reformation, p. 111.

79 Kohls, Ernst Wilhelm, Luther oder Erasmus, Bands I and II Friedrich Reinhardt, Verlag Basel, 1978Google Scholar.

80 Erasmus Symposium, of 1971 p. 41.

81 Religion, Book 3, V, p. 100.