Excerpts from an open letter written by Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam to Abbot Antony Bergen (addressing Emperor Maxmillian), 1514. Cited in Erasmus and our Struggle for Peace, by Jose Chapiro (Boston: Beacon Press, 1950).
I see great movements arising. . . . May the favor of God calm this tempest in Christendom. . . . I often wonder what drives—I will not say Christians—but men to exterminate one another like madmen at the price of such effort, such expense, and such risks. What do we do all our life long but wage war? Not even all animals fight, except some wild species. And even they fight not among themselves but with animals of a different species. Besides, they fight with their natural weapons and not with machines in the invention of which we employ an ingenuity worthy of the devils. . . .
Consider also how many crimes are committed under the pretext of war, when, as they say, arms speak and the laws are silent; how many thefts, how many sacrilegious acts, how many rapes, how many other abuses which one is ashamed to name! And this moral contagion lasts for many years after the war is over. If one calculates the expenses of a war, one will see how much more one loses than gains, even when he is the victor. What kingdom that is won can compensate for the life and the blood of so many thousand people? And yet it is those who have nothing to do with the fighting who are the most bitterly afflicted by the evils of war.
The advantages of peace benefit everyone, but war makes even the victor weep. And it is accompanied by such a host of calamities that it verifies the fiction of the poets who say that war comes to us from hell and that it is sent by the Furies. And I am not speaking of the popular uprisings within states, which are productive of the most disastrous results.
If it is a desire for fame which leads us into the temptation to wage war, such fame cannot be the true kind, because it is sought principally by acts of injustice. It is far more glorious to found states than to destroy them. If gain is our objective, no war was ever ended so satisfactorily that it did not cause more harm than good to those engaged in it, and no sovereign can injure his enemy in war without, first, injuring his own subjects. Finally, when we see human affairs, like the ebb and flow of Euripus, subject to perpetual change and always confused, what is the advantage of exerting such effort to build an empire which, some day, after a great overturn, will pass into other hands? With how much blood the Roman Empire was built and how soon it began to crumble!
You will tell me that the rights of sovereigns should be upheld. It is not for me to speak carelessly of the actions of princes. I know only that excessive right is excessive injustice (summum jus summa injuria). There are princes who decide first what they want and then seek for pretexts to cloak the real motives for their warlike actions. But who, I wonder, among the great changes to which human affairs are subject, will ever lack a pretext?
Let us admit that there are real grounds for dispute. . . . Is it necessary to shed blood? . . . There are popes, bishops, wise men of unshakable integrity who can regulate these small disputes without starting wars—always followed by other wars and without bringing chaos to both divine and human things. It is the very function of the Roman Pontiff, of the cardinals, the bishops and abbots, to settle the disputes between Christian princes. It is for that purpose that they should use their authority!...
But, you will say, suppose that the other side refuses to submit to the decision of these well-meaning people; in that case, what do you expect me to do? To that I reply: First, if you are a real Christian, I suggest that you bear and forbear, submerging your rights, whatever they may be. Second, if you are a wise man, I would urge you to calculate what it would cost to defend your rights. If the price is excessive—and it surely will be if you take to arms—do not insist on your rights, which, after all, may be unfounded, at a cost of so many miseries inflicted upon humanity, so many dead, so many orphans, so many tears. . . . If rights there are which must be defended by arms, they can only be of the grosser kind, having the savor of a Christianity that is already degenerating, and weighed down with the burden of worldly goods. In this case, and in spite of the fact that war is not always disapproved of by pious authors when, to uphold our faith, Christian peace is defended against the invasion of barbarians—in that case, I say, I do not know whether I should approve of such wars. Why should we rely upon these—after all—only human authorities rather than on the many maxims of Christ, the Apostles, and the most orthodox and approved Fathers of the Church, on peace and on the forgiveness of evils? Besides, what policy cannot be justified in some way? Particularly the policy of those who, having in their hands the conduct of affairs of state, are the very men whose crimes are praised by the flattery of so many people without a single one daring to criticize their mistakes, in spite of the fact that everyone knows the sighs, the longings, and the prayers for peace of reasonable people. And if you look closer you will see that generally it is personal interests of princes alone which cause wars. But, I ask you, do you think it is compatible with humanity that the world should constantly be upset from top to bottom by war for no other motive than because such-and-such a sovereign has some reason to complain of another, or perhaps only pretends to have?
We may hope for the best outcome but it will only be a hope. For my part, whatever fortune I may have lies in England. I would renounce it gladly if Christian peace could be established among Christians. This project would be greatly advanced if you were to assert your authority whose influence is so great over Prince Charles and still greater over Maximilian, while the English nobility is in sympathy with it. I have no doubt that you have already observed the great evils caused by war, even the warlike actions of your friends. That is why, by endeavoring to put an end to war, you would be serving your own interests…
Comments