What do you think?
Rate this book
The Oxford Reformers: John Colet, Erasmus and Thomas More
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
551 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 1970
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
July 14, 2026
Back when Goodreads was useful, before ubiquitous ads, when you could easily change the edition of the book you were reading so the cover matched and the edition matched, back then I say I would have easily (or more easily, at least) changed this to a book by Frederic Seebohm with an "m," as written on the cover of the Everyman Library edition I read. Though, the book spells the city "Wittemberg," so maybe the n and m got transposed, several people were confused during the manufacturing process, or, perhaps most likely, none of it matters.
This fine work is mainly a victory parade for Colet, Erasmus, and More, with refreshingly a great deal on Colet as the main star of the show, the "older brother" and great friend of E + M, whose example inspired them to become what they became.
Sure, it presents them all positively for the most part and does not treat on their faults, but I'm not sure that makes it "biased" as if they weren't the heroes the book makes them out to be. It's from their perspective, and it's fairly generous to Luther and Henry VIII, even Julius II and Leo X, and very positive about Melancthon.
The ending even briefly concludes with how they basically failed: all three were close advisors to some of the most powerful people in the Western world, some of the most powerful, world-changing people of all time, gave great advice and bold opinions on statecraft, military might, religious life and infrastructure, the primacy of actual Scripture over medieval commentary, the reminder that Augustine wasn't the only Church Father worth attending to, the importance of knowing languages and actually reading authors before criticizing them, and all the while with self-effacing humor and peace-making satire for all and sundry.
And yet. The world listened to Machiavelli's Prince instead of Erasmus's Christian Prince, and Henry listened to Thomas Cromwell instead of Thomas More, and not enough people then as now listened to Colet.
And "Reformers" listened to the impetuous, vituperative not-so-well-read Luther as the best way to reform the church, by shattering it, instead of the "Oxford Reformers" and their path of learning, reading, preaching the Bible instead of man's opinions, and laughing at oneself and others and living at peace with all as much as possible. Interesting choice, that.
This fine work is mainly a victory parade for Colet, Erasmus, and More, with refreshingly a great deal on Colet as the main star of the show, the "older brother" and great friend of E + M, whose example inspired them to become what they became.
Sure, it presents them all positively for the most part and does not treat on their faults, but I'm not sure that makes it "biased" as if they weren't the heroes the book makes them out to be. It's from their perspective, and it's fairly generous to Luther and Henry VIII, even Julius II and Leo X, and very positive about Melancthon.
The ending even briefly concludes with how they basically failed: all three were close advisors to some of the most powerful people in the Western world, some of the most powerful, world-changing people of all time, gave great advice and bold opinions on statecraft, military might, religious life and infrastructure, the primacy of actual Scripture over medieval commentary, the reminder that Augustine wasn't the only Church Father worth attending to, the importance of knowing languages and actually reading authors before criticizing them, and all the while with self-effacing humor and peace-making satire for all and sundry.
And yet. The world listened to Machiavelli's Prince instead of Erasmus's Christian Prince, and Henry listened to Thomas Cromwell instead of Thomas More, and not enough people then as now listened to Colet.
And "Reformers" listened to the impetuous, vituperative not-so-well-read Luther as the best way to reform the church, by shattering it, instead of the "Oxford Reformers" and their path of learning, reading, preaching the Bible instead of man's opinions, and laughing at oneself and others and living at peace with all as much as possible. Interesting choice, that.
February 4, 2026
Even though you are getting a gated and heavily edited biased position and opinion on three of some of the most important English personalities, it is still a well worth read for the rich content and characterization of these three great men. Erasmus is often, unfairly, characterized as the hen that laid the egg for the Protestant Reformation while Luther hatched it.
I think the Albigensians carry that torch well before Erasmus ever did and the main points in Luther's rebellion can be found in that heresy and within all its central points.
Colet is often abusive in his manner and though he seems to live an exemplary life, he suffered from being so liberal in his critique of Bishops to the point of showing contempt. He may have had the best of intentions, but so did Luther in his own way.
Erasmus' only fault was that he played the part of Folly much too well in his Moriae Encomium (Praise of Folly). He suffered for the method acting role he played in how Folly would have interpreted every hideous and controversial subject she chose to speak on. Erasmus can't help himself bleed through in some of his updates that tear into the rhythm of his work and, I say, alters the spirit of how well he channeled (gosh I hate how that word will make me come off) Folly.
As a Humanist, he should never be forgotten and it is sad that he is largely unknown in our day. How that happened I do not understand except that so many people consider Latin, in their ignorance, as a 'dead language'. Only, I suspect, because it will open up the history of the world and the influence and effect the holy Roman Catholic Church has had on the literature and history of the world.
As for Thomas More. This man speaks so very well for himself. I can hardly add anything to such a man. Learning from him is learning from the very best of men.
I think the Albigensians carry that torch well before Erasmus ever did and the main points in Luther's rebellion can be found in that heresy and within all its central points.
Colet is often abusive in his manner and though he seems to live an exemplary life, he suffered from being so liberal in his critique of Bishops to the point of showing contempt. He may have had the best of intentions, but so did Luther in his own way.
Erasmus' only fault was that he played the part of Folly much too well in his Moriae Encomium (Praise of Folly). He suffered for the method acting role he played in how Folly would have interpreted every hideous and controversial subject she chose to speak on. Erasmus can't help himself bleed through in some of his updates that tear into the rhythm of his work and, I say, alters the spirit of how well he channeled (gosh I hate how that word will make me come off) Folly.
As a Humanist, he should never be forgotten and it is sad that he is largely unknown in our day. How that happened I do not understand except that so many people consider Latin, in their ignorance, as a 'dead language'. Only, I suspect, because it will open up the history of the world and the influence and effect the holy Roman Catholic Church has had on the literature and history of the world.
As for Thomas More. This man speaks so very well for himself. I can hardly add anything to such a man. Learning from him is learning from the very best of men.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews