It is quite typical to refer to the period of history known as the Reformation as a paradigm shift sparked by one man---Martin Luther. He nailed his ninety-five theses to the church door in Wittenberg, pounding the Church into its rightful place whilst catapulting human history into the Reformation. However, while it makes for a nice story, the facts run much deeper than at first presumed. Luther likely did not nail the theses to the door at all. More importantly, there is a rich history of intellectual thought that precedes Luther’s actions without which the Reformation would never have happened. In his book, The Great Humanists: An Introduction, Jonathan Arnold brings to life the intellectual and cultural developments in the centuries leading
…show more content…
Arnold rightly cites Petrarch as the major pioneer of this movement. It was Petrarch that sought a wide-spread revival of all things ancient. Arnold tempers his claim by noting that Petrarch did not
2
influence all of civilization as some scholars, such as Charles Nauert, claim. Yet, Petrarch’s influence was great enough to spark a shift away from the medieval mindset. This way of thinking set the stage for later humanists such as Erasmus. Arnold notes several similarities that the humanists shared, but the most prominent is the value that humanists placed on Scripture. In returning to the sources they were no longer content with the translations available at the time. This is most evident in the life of Erasmus. He saw a distinct danger in trying to interpret Scripture without a working knowledge of the original languages in which they were written. This resulted in the unearthing of errors found within the Latin Vulgate which in turn called into question the absolute authority of those clergy charged with interpreting and expounding the Scriptures to the masses. While Erasmus remained faithful to the Catholic Church, his developments regarding a return to the original sources formed a foundation for the reformers to build
Arnold rightly cites Petrarch as the major pioneer of this movement. It was Petrarch that sought a wide-spread revival of all things ancient. Arnold tempers his claim by noting that Petrarch did not
2
influence all of civilization as some scholars, such as Charles Nauert, claim. Yet, Petrarch’s influence was great enough to spark a shift away from the medieval mindset. This way of thinking set the stage for later humanists such as Erasmus. Arnold notes several similarities that the humanists shared, but the most prominent is the value that humanists placed on Scripture. In returning to the sources they were no longer content with the translations available at the time. This is most evident in the life of Erasmus. He saw a distinct danger in trying to interpret Scripture without a working knowledge of the original languages in which they were written. This resulted in the unearthing of errors found within the Latin Vulgate which in turn called into question the absolute authority of those clergy charged with interpreting and expounding the Scriptures to the masses. While Erasmus remained faithful to the Catholic Church, his developments regarding a return to the original sources formed a foundation for the reformers to build