MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W108142639

Erasmus of Rotterdam's influence upon Anabaptism: The case of Balthasar Hubmaier

2005· dissertation· en· W108142639 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Darren Williamson

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsErasmus+ArtArt historyThe Renaissance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reformation historians have long debated the question of Erasmus' influence upon Anabaptism. Research, however, has paid insufficient attention to Balthasar Hubmaier (1480-1 528)' the earliest Anabaptist theologian, and no one has attempted a substantial analysis of Erasmus' influence on him with attention to the problem of influence. Hubmaier's formal theological training and popularity as a preacher made contact possible with humanists and Erasmus. Evidence from his Waldshut pastorate indicates a rejection of scholasticism in favour of humanism and special esteem for Erasmus. He met Erasmus in Basel in 1522 at a decisive point of his religious conversion and referred to him in his later writings, indicating knowledge of his major works. Hubmaier was clearly in a position to be influenced by Erasmus. Erasmus' Paraphrase on Matthew (1 522) attracted contemporary criticism and modern speculation for its supposed Anabaptist tendencies. In an attempt to determine Erasmian influence, this study compares Erasmus' and Hubmaier's interpretations of important passages in Matthew and places them within the context of key patristic, medieval, and sixteenth-century commentators. Erasmus' exegesis of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20) stresses prebaptismal instruction in ways uncommon in the exegetical tradition and Hubmaier employed the same interpretation to oppose infant baptism. Unlike most commentators, Erasmus interpreted the parable of the tares (Matthew 13:24-30; 36-43) as promoting the toleration of heretics and the same argument formed the basis of Hubmaier's On Heretics (1 524). Erasmus' interpretation of the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16:15-20; 18:15-20) deemphasized the primacy of Peter, connected the keys with Christian initiation, and laicized the process of excommunication, but Hubmaier underscored other aspects of the passage. Comparative exegesis suggests Erasmus influenced Hubmaier's interpretation of the Great Commission and the parable of the tares, but not his view of the keys of the Kingdom. Erasmus was not an Anabaptist, nor was he responsible for Anabaptism, but the evidence highlights the potentially radical ramifications of his biblical exegesis and raises again the issue of reception as important to a full appreciation of his legacy. Recourse to Erasmus' exegesis could illumine other aspects of Hubmaier's thought and help explain elements of Anabaptism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207