recursor of the modern
spirit?

Regarded as a child of the sixteenth century, he does seem to differ
from the general tenor of his times. Among those vehemently passionate,
drastically energetic and violent natures of the great ones of his day,
Erasmus stands as the man of too few prejudices, with a little too much
delicacy of taste, with a deficiency, though not, indeed, in every
department, of that _stultitia_ which he had praised as a necessary
constituent of life. Erasmus is the man who is too sensible and moderate
for the heroic.

What a surprising difference there is between the _accent_ of Erasmus
and that of Luther, Calvin, and Saint Teresa! What a difference, also,
between his accent, that is, the accent of humanism, and that of
Albrecht Duerer, of Michelangelo, or of Shakespeare.

Erasmus seems, at times, the man who was not strong enough for his age.
In that robust sixteenth century it seems as if the oaken strength of
Luther was necessary, the steely edge of Calvin, the white heat of
Loyola; not the velvet softness of Erasmus. Not only were their force
and their fervour necessary, but also their depth, their unsparing,
undaunted consistency, sincerity and outspokenness.

They cannot bear that smile which makes Luther speak of the guileful
being looking out of Erasmus's features. His piety is too even for them,
too limp. Loyola has testified that the reading of the _Enchiridion
militis Christiani_ relaxed his fervour and made his devotion grow cold.
He saw that warrior of Christ differently, in the glowing colours of the
Spanish-Christian, medieval ideal of chivalry.

Erasmus had never passed through those depths of self-reprobation and
that consciousness of sin which Luther had traversed with toil; he saw
no devil to fight with, and tears were not familiar to him. Was he
altogether unaware of the deepest mystery? Or did it rest in him too
deep for utterance?

Let us not suppose too quickly that we are more nearly allied to Luther
or Loyola because their figures appeal to us more. If at present our
admiration goes out again to the ardently pious, and to spiritual
extremes, it is partly because our unstable time requires strong
stimuli. To appreciate Erasmus we should begin by giving up our
admiration of the extravagant, and for many this requires a certain
effort at present. It is extremely easy to break the staff over Erasmus.
His faults lie on the surface, and though he wished to hide many things,
h