CHAPTER V.

RELIGIOUS LIFE AND WORKS.

'Philosophia veritatem quaerit, theologia invenit, religio possidet."-Pico DELLA MIRANDOLA.

THE early theological studies of More have already been mentioned, and his connexion with the awakening of religious inquiry in England has been referred to. A few words may recall his position, before his writings are specifically examined.

con

That his views were throughout his life in substantial accordance with those of Erasmus there can be little reason to doubt. In so far as humanism sisted in a new and vital perception of the essential dignity of man apart from theological determinations" the whole tone of More's writings proves him to have been a humanist. But this consciousness of man's own dignity and power was combined in him with no under-estimation of the value of Christian doctrine. Rather was the ideal of his humanism distinctly the product of Christian thought. He was thus able to combine intense devotion to the Church with the strongest reprobation of ecclesiastical scandals and the most acute perception of the follies of a stagnant theology. He wrote some of his most

stinging epigrams against ignorant and immoral priests and incompetent bishops. Before the publication of the Utopia, his antagonism to the tyranny of the Scotist theologians was well known, and he was looked upon with suspicion by those who thought that knowledge of Greek fostered heresy. In 1517 Pace could say of him (it was after telling an amusing story of one of his wit-combats with dull theologians)—

"This one piece of ill-luck, I grieve to tell you, follows More: whenever he speaks most skilfully and acutely among your white-mitred fathers with reference to their special science, they always condemn him and call all he says childish folly, not because they really think him worthy of condemnation, but because they are envious of his remarkable genius and his knowledge of other sciences whereof they are ignorant-in a word, because a mere boy (so they call him) a long way excels his elders in wisdom."

When Erasmus published his New Testament, More warmly commended it to the great men of the time, exclaiming in his verses to the reader (printed among his epigrams)—

"Nova Christi lex nova luce (nitet"

In 1519, he gave a most clear exposition of his dissent from the extravagances of popular belief and practice in a letter to a monk who had warned him against associating with the contemner of the Vulgate.2

1 De Fructu qui ex Doctrinâ Percipitur, pp. 83, 84. Basil.

1517.

2 Epistolae aliquot eruditorum virorum, pp. 92–138. Basil. 1520. See above, pp. 72 sqq.

In spite, however, of his sense of the vices of the clergy, More had abandoned few, if any, of the doctrines of the Church, in whose name it was that he rebuked sin and defended learning. This is most clearly seen in his controversial works, but even the Utopia is not without traces of the same attitude. No portion of More's ideal republic has been more often the subject of commentary than the chapter De Religionibus Utopiensium. On the beautiful

1

picture of a benign and rational toleration which it presents Mr. Seebohm 1 has rightly laid much stress, but he has surely gone beyond his text when he finds in the Utopians a "fearless faith in the consistency of Christianity with science” and a “significant denial of any sacerdotal sense to their priesthood. Is there any less slender foundation for a statement of the Utopians' faith in the consistency of Christianity with science than the words gratum Deo cultum putant naturæ contemplationem laudemque ab ea? 2 The "significant denial" of sacerdotalism Mr. Seebohm supports by a quotation which is scarcely correct; and he does not observe the prostration of the people on the priest's entrance, or the distinctly mentioned eucharistic significance of his vestments. The question is of interest only as showing how far the Utopia represents More's own opinions, for few who have read any of his writings would imagine that any question of the "consistency 1 Oxford Reformers, pp. 355 sqq.

66

2 Latin Works, Louvain, 1555, p. 17a. Translated by Ralph Robinson, They think that the contemplation of nature and the praise thereof coming is to God a very acceptable honour" (Arber's reprint, p. 149).

a

1

of Christianity with science" ever occurred to him; nor can there be the least doubt that More attributed "sacerdotal sense to the Christian priesthood. In so thinking he may of course have been bigoted and ignorant, but he can hardly be said to deserve an undenominationalist's eulogy. Indeed, all such arguments, both on the religion and on the philosophy of the Utopians, are based on an inference which, whether just or not, More himself never draws. For instance, it has been said that the Utopians "recognized, as Mr. Mill urges that Christians ought to do now, 'in the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth the complete spirit of the ethics of utility.'" Now the passage which is alluded to refers unquestionably to the views of the Utopians before their conversion to Christianity, and therefore cannot prove any connexion between their philosophy and the revelation of Christ. It is, of course, open to any one to say that their conversion would have made no change in their philosophic opinions, but it is hardly permissible to take the point for granted. It must indeed be admitted that throughout his book Mr. Seebohm, while he rightly lays stress on the agreement between the views of Colet, Erasmus, and More, seems to exaggerate the freedom of their opinions. One instance of their cordial acceptance of views which we are accustomed to regard as especially medieval will suffice. The question of ecclesiastical privilege may be regarded as a typical one. In England at least the claim to exemption from civil jurisdiction had always been warmly 1 The Oxford Reformers, 1st edition, p. 286.

contested, and the progress of the Reformation pronounced more and more decisively against it. But More, even in his Utopia, uses the strongest arguments in its favour, while Colet, in his famous sermon before the Convocation of 1512,1 expressly declared it to be just. The "Oxford reformers" were indeed liberal, tolerant, and pious beyond the standard of their time, but in doctrine they firmly maintained the principles of the Catholic Church. Colet did not live to express an opinion on the great movements of the foreign reformers; Erasmus, after hesitating for a while, opposed them; More strongly and decisively condemned their whole position.

Before he was forced into the arena of theological controversy More had begun to write a short devotional treatise of great value on the text Memorare novissima, et in aeternum non peccabis.2 The book, which is almost unknown, is well worthy to be reprinted: it is exceedingly interesting, not only as an illustration of the sincerity and beauty of More's character, but also as an example of the highest standard of Catholic devotion immediately before the Reformation. The title names it a "treatysse (unfynysshed) upon these wordes of Holye Scrypture, Memorare nouissima, et in eternum non peccabis, 'Remember the last thynges, and thou shalt neuer synne," and adds that it was "made about the yere of our Lorde 1522." The interest which attaches to the few pages lies not only in the quaint and

1 Given in The Oxford Reformers.

2 English Works, 1557, pp. 72-102. The treatise is unfinished.

1