Humessay

Machiavelli’s reasoning for his arguments is rooted in logical political analysis, while Erasmus’s recommendations for behavior stem from the Christian ideal; therefore, Las Casas’s perspective aligns more closely with Erasmus’s in that he uses a Christian basis for his advice to Prince Philip.
Erasmus’s argument mainly attempts to persuade Erasmus further demonstrates his Christian perspective in his criticism of holy wars, “I see you, while the standard of salvation is in one hand rushing on with a sword in the other, to the murder of your brother; and, under the banner of the cross, destroying the life of one who to the cross owes his salvation” (Erasmus 42). Again, Erasmus highlights the hypocrisy of contemporary Christians; he stresses the pivotal importance of peace in Christianity, and attributes the depravity of those who fight in the name of God to their failure to recognize the paradox to which they fight for. Erasmus uses Christianity as the basis to appeal to the reader; the way that he underlines salvation, a critical aspect of Christians’ faith, to appeal to the reader’s sense of piety and unity, is indicative of his Christian perspective. That is, the fact that Erasmus’s primary reason against war is that it is un-Christian is a consequence of his Christian perspective. Furthermore, Erasmus recommends that kings, in an effort to behave as true Christians, should depend on religion and the clergy to maintain correct behavior. Consequently, Erasmus says, “Let him [the king] exercise his power as far as he pleases, within those bounds which he will always see clearly, when he remembers that he is a man governing men…a Christian presiding over a nation of Christians” (Erasmus 45). Therefore, Erasmus’s point is that a king should act based on Christian principles; he equates piety with good rule. He goes on to say, “Let him be persuaded that the best method of enriching and improving his realm, is not by taking from the territory of others, but by...