Erasmus, the Praise of Folly1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Erasmus, the Praise of Folly1 1 Primary Source 7.1 ERASMUS, THE PRAISE OF FOLLY1 The author, Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466–1536) was an extraordinarily learned Christian humanist. He advocated returning to the original sources of the faith and as such published the first printed edition of the Greek New Testament 1516 (as well as subsequent editions), which strongly influenced several of the main actors of the Reformation, including Martin Luther. The Praise of Folly (1511), his most famous work, is a biting satire told through the person of the Goddess Folly (or Foolishness) who claims to inspire a vast range of human action, from lovers who fail to see their beloveds’ faults to clergy and popes enjoying worldly pleasures while shunning their duties to Christ’s flock. For Erasmus, the Christian faith was the most awesome treasure of humanity and should stir people’s souls to ecstasy and self-transformation. He had no patience for the dry intellectualizing of scholastic philosophers, as is obvious from the passage below. The complete text is available here. For a freely accessible audio recording, click here. And next these come our philosophers, so much reverenced for their furred gowns and starched beards2 that they look upon themselves as the only wise men and all others as shadows. [They] give out that they have discovered ideas, universalities, separated forms, first matters, quiddities, haecceities,3 formalities, and the like stuff; things so thin and bodiless that I believe even Lynceus4 himself was not able to perceive them. But then chiefly do they disdain the unhallowed crowd as often as with their triangles, quadrangles, circles, and the like mathematical devices, more confusing than a labyrinth, and letters disposed one against the other, as it were in battle array, they cast a mist before the eyes of the ignorant. Nor is there wanting of this kind some that pretend to foretell things by the stars and make promises of miracles beyond all things of soothsaying, and are so fortunate as to meet with people that believe them.5 But perhaps I had better pass over our divines6 in silence and not stir this pool or touch this fair but unsavory plant, as a kind of men that are supercilious beyond comparison, and to that too, implacable; lest setting them about my ears, they attack me by troops and force me to a recantation sermon, which if I refuse, 1 Desiderius Erasmus, The Praise of Folly, (Trans.) John Wilson (Oxford: Claerendon Press, 1913), 112-23, 133-38. 2 Throughout the passage, Erasmus continuously makes veiled reference to works of classical antiquity and medieval philosophy. See the copious footnotes and a more accessible translation in Desiderius Erasmus, The Praise of Folly, (Trans. and Ed.) Clarence H. Miller (New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 1979). 3 Quiddity and haecceity are medieval philosophical terms referring, respectively, to an object’s universal and particular qualities. 4 A mythic Greek hero supposedly able to see through dense physical objects. 5 Astrology was highly popular among the learned in Erasmus’s day. 6 Theologians. 2 they straight pronounce me a heretic. For this is the thunderbolt with which they fright those whom they are resolved not to favor. And truly, though there are few others that less willingly acknowledge the kindnesses I have done them, yet even these too stand fast bound to me upon no ordinary accounts; while being happy in their own opinion, and as if they dwelt in the third heaven, they look with haughtiness on all others as poor creeping things and could almost find in their hearts to pity them; while hedged in with so many magisterial definitions, conclusions, corollaries, propositions explicit and implicit, they abound with so many starting-holes that Vulcan's net7 cannot hold them so fast, but they'll slip through with their distinctions, with which they so easily cut all knots asunder that a hatchet could not have done it better, so plentiful are they in their new-found words and prodigious terms. Besides, while they explicate the most hidden mysteries according to their own fancy—as how the world was first made; how original sin is derived to posterity; in what manner, how much room, and how long time Christ lay in the Virgin's womb; how accidents subsist in the Eucharist without their subject.8 But these are common and threadbare; these are worthy of our great and illuminated divines, as the world calls them! At these, if ever they fall athwart them, they prick up—as whether there was any instant of time in the generation of the Second Person9; whether there be more than one filiation in Christ; whether it be a possible proposition that God the Father hates the Son; or whether it was possible that Christ could have taken upon Him the likeness of a woman, or of the devil, or of an ass, or of a stone, or of a gourd;10 and then how that gourd should have preached, wrought miracles, or been hung on the cross; and what Peter had consecrated if he had administered the Sacrament at what time the body of Christ hung upon the cross; or whether at the same time he might be said to be man; whether after the Resurrection there will be any eating and drinking, since we are so much afraid of hunger and thirst in this world. There are infinite of these subtle trifles, and others more subtle than these, of notions, relations, instants, formalities, quiddities, haecceities, which no one can perceive without a Lynceus whose eyes could look through a stone wall and discover those things through the thickest darkness that never were. Add to this those their other determinations, and those too so contrary to common opinion that those oracles of the Stoics, which they call paradoxes, seem in comparison of these but blockish and idle—as 'tis a lesser crime to kill a thousand men than to set a stitch on a poor man's shoe on the Sabbath day;11 and that a man should rather choose that the whole world with all food and raiment, as they say, should perish, than tell a lie, though never so inconsiderable. And these most subtle 7 In Greco-Roman mythology, the god of fire, Vulcan, captured his wife, Venus, and her lover Mars in a net. 8 The Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation holds that during Holy Communion the bread and wine retain their properties (accidents) while becoming the actual substance of Christ’s body and blood. 9 That is, Christ. 10 Scholastic philosophers really discussed many such questions. See Erasmus, The Praise of Folly, 88n5. 11 The latter is a crime against God; the former, against one’s neighbor. 3 subtleties are rendered yet more subtle by the several methods of so many Schoolmen,12 that one might sooner wind himself out of a labyrinth than the entanglements of the realists, nominalists, Thomists, Albertists, Occamists, Scotists.13 Nor have I named all the several sects, but only some of the chief; in all which there is so much doctrine and so much difficulty that I may well conceive the apostles, had they been to deal with these new kind of divines, had needed to have prayed in aid of some other spirit. Paul knew what faith was, and yet when he said, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen," he did not define it doctor- like.14 And as he understood charity well himself, so he did as illogically divide and define it to others in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, Chapter the thirteenth. And devoutly, no doubt, did the apostles consecrate the Eucharist; yet, had they been asked the question touching the "terminus a quo" and the "terminus ad quem"15 of transubstantiation; of the manner how the same body can be in several places at one and the same time; of the difference the body of Christ has in heaven from that of the cross, or this in the Sacrament; in what point of time transubstantiation is, whereas prayer, by means of which it is, as being a discrete quantity, is transient; they would not, I conceive, have answered with the same subtlety as the Scotists dispute and define it. They knew the mother of Jesus, but which of them has so philosophically demonstrated how she was preserved from original sin as have done our divines? Peter received the keys, and from Him too that would not have trusted them with a person unworthy; yet whether he had understanding or no, I know not, for certainly he never attained to that subtlety to determine how he could have the key of knowledge that had no knowledge himself.16 They baptized far and near, and yet taught nowhere what was the formal, material, efficient, and final cause17 of baptism, nor made the least mention of delible and indelible characters.18 They worshiped, 'tis true, but in spirit, following herein no other than that of the Gospel, "God is a Spirit, and they that worship, must worship him in spirit and truth;"19 yet it does not appear it was at that time revealed to them that an image sketched on the wall with a coal was to be worshiped with the same worship as Christ Himself,20 if at least the two forefingers be stretched out, the hair long and uncut, and have three rays about the crown of the head. For who can conceive these things, unless he has spent at least six and thirty years in the philosophical and supercelestial whims of Aristotle and the Schoolmen? 12 Scholastic philosophers.
Recommended publications
  • Erasmus on the Study of Scriptures
    -- CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Erasmus the Exegete MARVIN ANDERSON Erasmm on the Study of Scriptures CARL S. MEYER Erasmus, Luther, and Aquinas PHILIP WATSON Forms of Church and Ministry ERWIN L. LUEKER Homiletics Book Review Vol. XL December 1969 No. 11 Erasmus on the Study of Scriptures CARL S. MEYER Erasmus (1469-1536)1 was the editor one of the important theologians of the of the first published Greek New Tes­ first half of the 16th century 6 as well as tament printed from movable type (1516).2 an earnest advocate of the study of Scrip­ He translated the books of the New Testa­ tures.7 ment into Latin 3 and also paraphrased I them (except Revelation) in that lan­ Prerequisites for Biblical studies coin­ guage.4 He published the notes of Lorenzo cide with the characteristics one brings to Valla (1406--1457) on the New Testa­ the philosophy of Christ, Erasmus held. ment.5 He must likewise be accounted as This meant a heart undefiled by the sordid­ ness of vice and unaffected by the dis­ 1 The standard edition of Erasmus' writings is DesMerii Erasmi Roterodami Opera Omnia, quietude of greed.8 We must therefore ed. J. Clericus (10 vols.; Leyden, 1703-1706). examine the philosophia Christi concept The reprint issued by Gregg Press in London, in Erasmus as the basis for understanding 1961-1962, was used. Cited as LB. Ausgewiihtte Werke, ed. Hajo Holborn his approach to Sacred Writ. (Munich: C. H. Vedagsbuchhandlung, 1933). Erasmus used a variety of phrases for Cited as AW. Ausgewiihlte Schriften, ed. Werner Welzig this concept.
    [Show full text]
  • 162 [Part I. Review of Erasmus's Preface]
    162 WORD AND FAITH For although you think and write wrongly about free choice,k yet I owe you no small thanks, for you have made me far more sure of my own position by letting me see the case for free choice put forward with all the energy of so distinguished and powerful a mind, but with no other effect than to make things worse than 27. Luther had stated this as early as before. That is plain evidence that free choice is a pure fiction;27 in his 1518 Heidelberg Disputation (WA for, like the woman in the Gospel [Mark 5:25f.], the more it is 1:353–74; LW 31:[37–38] 39–70). Here treated by the doctors, the worse it gets. I shall therefore abun- he explains the free will to be just a dantly pay my debt of thanks to you, if through me you become word, not a real thing (res de solo titulo). better informed, as I through you have been more strongly con- firmed. But both of these things are gifts of the Spirit, not our own achievement. Therefore, we must pray that God may open my mouth and your heart, and the hearts of all human beings, and that God may be present in our midst as the master who informs both our speaking and hearing. But from you, my dear Erasmus, let me obtain this request, that just as I bear with your ignorance in these matters, so you in turn will bear with my lack of eloquence. God does not give all his gifts to one man, and “we cannot all do all things”; or, as Paul says: “There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit” [1 Cor.
    [Show full text]
  • St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Williams Honors College, Honors Research The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors Projects College Spring 2020 St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death Christopher Choma [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects Part of the Christianity Commons, Epistemology Commons, European History Commons, History of Philosophy Commons, History of Religion Commons, Metaphysics Commons, Philosophy of Mind Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Recommended Citation Choma, Christopher, "St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death" (2020). Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects. 1048. https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/honors_research_projects/1048 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by The Dr. Gary B. and Pamela S. Williams Honors College at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The University of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Williams Honors College, Honors Research Projects by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 1 St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas on the Mind, Body, and Life After Death By: Christopher Choma Sponsored by: Dr. Joseph Li Vecchi Readers: Dr. Howard Ducharme Dr. Nathan Blackerby 2 Table of Contents Introduction p. 4 Section One: Three General Views of Human Nature p.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Aquinas and Irenaeus on the Divine and Natural Law
    Randall B. Smith University of St. Thomas, Houston, Texas [email protected] 13 (2020) 2: 175–187 ORCID: 0000-0003-4262-4279 ISSN (print) 1689-5150 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/BPTh.2020.007 ISSN (online) 2450-7059 Thomas Aquinas and Irenaeus on the Divine and Natural Law Abstract. Thomas’s account of the natural law owes a large debt to Aristotle and other early Greek philosophers back to Heraclitus. This debt has long been known and dis- cussed. Largely unrecognized, however, are the crucial influences of the early Greek Fathers of the Church who mediated this classical philosophical heritage to the Chris- tian world. They were the first to set out the relationship between the natural law, the Old Law, and grace which would have a decisive influence on Aquinas’s famous “trea- tise on law” in the Summa of Theology. In this paper, I analyze Thomas’s mature work on the natural law in STh I–II, qq. 90–108 and show how the roots of this view can be traced to the earliest Church, especially in the writings of the second century bishop and martyr, St. Irenaeus of Lyons. Of special interest is how Irenaeus transformed the Greek-Aristotelian notion of physis and “natural law” within the context of his discus- sion of the goodness of creation and the Mosaic Law, contrary to the popular Gnostic views of his day. Keywords: Thomas Aquinas; Ireneaus; natural law; divine law; Mosaic Law; Old Law; Adversus Haereses. 1. A Common Narrative about the Natural Law: The Missing Historical Piece common narrative about the natural law divides its development
    [Show full text]
  • FR. WILLIAM B. GOLDIN, S.T.D. Intro to St. Thomas Aquinas the Sources of Catholic Theology
    FR. WILLIAM B. GOLDIN, S.T.D. CLASS 2, SACRA DOCTRINA: INTRODUCTION TO THEOLOGY 3 SEPTEMBER 2020 ST. IRENAEUS CHURCH—CYPRESS, CALIFORNIA Intro to St. Thomas Aquinas The Sources of Catholic Theology Finishing Class 1: Faith and Reason in the Scholastic Period I. Theology as Scientia: Intro to Saint Thomas Aquinas Class 2, Part I: Theology as Scientia: Intro to Saint Thomas Aquinas I. The Contribution of St. Thomas Aquinas to Theology II. How to Read Aquinas ST Ia, q. 1, aa. 1, 2, and 8: Article 1. Whether, besides philosophy, any further doctrine is required? Objection 1. It seems that, besides philosophical science, we have no need of any further knowledge. For man should not seek to know what is above reason: "Seek not the things that are too high for thee" (Sirach 3:22). But whatever is not above reason is fully treated of in philosophical science. Therefore any other knowledge besides philosophical science is superfluous. Objection 2. Further, knowledge can be concerned only with being, for nothing can be known, save what is true; and all that is, is true. But everything that is, is treated of in philosophical science—even God Himself; so that there is a part of philosophy called theology, or the divine science, as Aristotle has proved (Metaph. vi). Therefore, besides philosophical science, there is no need of any further knowledge. On the contrary, It is written (2 Timothy 3:16): "All Scripture, inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice." Now Scripture, inspired of God, is no part of philosophical science, which has been built up by human reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquinas's Sermon for the Feast of Pentecost
    Aquinas’s Sermon for the Feast of Pentecost: A Rare Glimpse of Thomas the Preaching Friar Peter A. Kwasniewski and Jeremy Holmes1 (1) INTRODUCTION Friar Thomas of the Order of Preachers For seven centuries St. Thomas Aquinas has been revered as the Church’s supreme dogmatic or speculative theologian. In the course of this long history, he has also, though perhaps less widely, been recognized as a scriptural exegete of considerable subtlety and insight.2 It is fair to say, however, that he is rarely thought of as a preacher. Indeed, the conventional image of him—that of an abstracted, solitary genius, aloof from the cares of the world, pacing the halls in pursuit of an argument, plunged into a literary apostolate of staggering dimensions—seems to exclude preaching from the round of activities in which he could have been realistically engaged. His popular nickname, the Angelic Doctor, though very well suited to the loftiness of his thought and the purity of his person, might convey the impression that Thomas, like Moses during the revela- tion of the Law, spent his days at the summit of God’s mountain, unseen by the people.3 Yet those who know more about the saint and his times have good reason for calling into question the fidelity of such a portrait to its flesh-and-blood original.4 Thomas gave himself heart and soul to a new religious community whose very identity was bound up with the mission of public preaching: the Dominicans, or more properly, the Ordo Fratrum Praedicatorum, the order of preaching brethren.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SCHOLASTIC PERIOD Beatus Rhenanus, a Close Friend Of
    CHAPTER THREE MEDIEVAL HISTORY: THE SCHOLASTIC PERIOD Beatus Rhenanus, a close friend of Erasmus and the most famous humanist historian of Germany, dated the rise of scholasticism (and hence the decay of theology) at “around the year of grace 1140”, when men like Peter Lombard (1095/1100–1160), Peter Abelard (1079–1142), and Gratian († c. 1150) were active.1 Erasmus, who cared relatively little about chronology, never gave such a precise indication, but one may assume that he did not disagree with Beatus, whose views may have directly influenced him. As we have seen, he believed that the fervour of the gospel had grown cold among most Christians during the previous four hundred years.2 Although his statement pertained to public morality rather than to theology,3 other passages from his work confirm that in Erasmus’ eyes those four centuries represented the age of scholasticism. In his biography of Jerome, he complained that for the scholastics nobody “who had lived before the last four hundred years” was a theologian,4 and in a work against Noël Bédier he pointed to a tradition of “four hun- dred years during which scholastic theology, gravely burdened by the decrees of the philosophers and the contrivances of the sophists, has wielded its reign”.5 In one other case he assigned to scholasti- cism a tradition of three centuries.6 Thus by the second half of the twelfth century, Western Christendom, in Erasmus’ conception, had entered the most distressing phase of its history, even though the 1 See John F. D’Amico, “Beatus Rhenanus, Tertullian and the Reformation: A Humanist’s Critique of Scholasticism”, Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 71 (1980), 37–63 esp.
    [Show full text]
  • Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations Spring 2010 Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Jason Skirry University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Skirry, Jason, "Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection" (2010). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 179. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/179 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Malebranche's Augustinianism and the Mind's Perfection Abstract This dissertation presents a unified interpretation of Malebranche’s philosophical system that is based on his Augustinian theory of the mind’s perfection, which consists in maximizing the mind’s ability to successfully access, comprehend, and follow God’s Order through practices that purify and cognitively enhance the mind’s attention. I argue that the mind’s perfection figures centrally in Malebranche’s philosophy and is the main hub that connects and reconciles the three fundamental principles of his system, namely, his occasionalism, divine illumination, and freedom. To demonstrate this, I first present, in chapter one, Malebranche’s philosophy within the historical and intellectual context of his membership in the French Oratory, arguing that the Oratory’s particular brand of Augustinianism, initiated by Cardinal Bérulle and propagated by Oratorians such as Andre Martin, is at the core of his philosophy and informs his theory of perfection. Next, in chapter two, I explicate Augustine’s own theory of perfection in order to provide an outline, and a basis of comparison, for Malebranche’s own theory of perfection.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Early History
    1 Early History 1. EAREEARLYLYY HISHHISTORYTORORY 5 1 Early History The fijirst attempts to study Arabic in Europe occurred in the Iberian peninsula. There, after the Arab conquests in the eighth century, a flourishing culture developed which was primarily Islamic but in which Christians and Jews played an important part. With the reconquest of Toledo from the Muslims by Alfonso VI of Castile a translation movement came into being which is known as the ‘Medieval Renaissance,’ and which was based in the cathedral of Toledo. The translations, often testifying to an imperfect knowledge of Arabic, covered a selection of scholarly works in the domains of medicine, geography, astronomy, mathematics, physics and philosophy.1 A substantial part consisted of texts by Greek and Hellenistic authors such as Aristotle, Euclid, Galen and Ptolemy which were no longer available in the West in their original form but which had been translated into Arabic from the ninth century onward under the Abbasid dynasty. In addition to these there were the works of Arabic-speaking scholars such as Ibn Sina (‘Avicenna’, c.980–1037), al-Ghazali (‘Algazel’ 1058–1111) and Ibn Rushd (‘Averroes’, 1126–1198), translated directly from Arabic into Latin. In most cases the translators relied on the assistance of local Arabic speakers. One example is the surgical manual of Abu ʼl-Qasim Khalaf ibn al-‘Abbas al-Zahrawi from Granada (c.936–c.1013), whose name was transformed into Latin as Albucasis, Abulcasis, Alsaharavius or other variants. The Latin translation of the text was made by the best known translator in Toledo, the Italian Gerardo da Cremona (1114–1187).
    [Show full text]
  • Justifying Religious Freedom: the Western Tradition
    Justifying Religious Freedom: The Western Tradition E. Gregory Wallace* Table of Contents I. THESIS: REDISCOVERING THE RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATIONS FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.......................................................... 488 II. THE ORIGINS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN EARLY CHRISTIAN THOUGHT ................................................................................... 495 A. Early Christian Views on Religious Toleration and Freedom.............................................................................. 495 1. Early Christian Teaching on Church and State............. 496 2. Persecution in the Early Roman Empire....................... 499 3. Tertullian’s Call for Religious Freedom ....................... 502 B. Christianity and Religious Freedom in the Constantinian Empire ................................................................................ 504 C. The Rise of Intolerance in Christendom ............................. 510 1. The Beginnings of Christian Intolerance ...................... 510 2. The Causes of Christian Intolerance ............................. 512 D. Opposition to State Persecution in Early Christendom...... 516 E. Augustine’s Theory of Persecution..................................... 518 F. Church-State Boundaries in Early Christendom................ 526 G. Emerging Principles of Religious Freedom........................ 528 III. THE PRESERVATION OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN MEDIEVAL AND REFORMATION EUROPE...................................................... 530 A. Persecution and Opposition in the Medieval
    [Show full text]
  • Augustine and Aquinas on Property Ownership
    Journal of Markets & Morality Volume 6, Number 2 (Fall 2003): 479–495 Copyright © 2003 Catholicism and the Economy: Augustine and Aquinas on Property Richard J. Dougherty Ownership University of Dallas This essay attempts to lay out the understanding of property ownership found in the writings of Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas. The reason for focus- ing on the thought of these two authors is, in part, that much of the contempo- rary discussion of Church teaching and the economy omits mention of these most prominent figures in the tradition. An additional reason for considering their work is that they both engage the argument laid out by Aristotle on prop- erty, thus bridging the distance between classical and Christian thought. The importance of this question can be seen when one assesses how contemporary policy makers might employ these principles in a largely secular social order. The central focus of both Augustine and Aquinas in their treatment of the question of property ownership is twofold, addressing the rightful acquisition and just use of such possessions. In the conclusion the essay considers some of the ramifications of this earlier teaching for contemporary Catholic social thought on the economy, suggesting that opposing positions will find both sup- port and challenges from the teaching of these authors. It would not be a controversial statement to suggest that the response to devel- opments in Catholic social teaching in the century-plus since the issuance of Rerum Novarum by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 has been marked by critiques and defenses across the political spectrum, as progressives and conservatives have alternately been bolstered or disheartened by the issuance of various papal encyclicals, especially, one might argue, on economic questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Chicken Soup for the Legal Soul: the Jurisprudence of Saint Thomas More
    Journal of Catholic Legal Studies Volume 51 Number 2 Volume 52, 2012, Number 2 Article 3 Chicken Soup for the Legal Soul: The Jurisprudence of Saint Thomas More Brian M. Murray Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcls Part of the Catholic Studies Commons This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Catholic Legal Studies by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CHICKEN SOUP FOR THE LEGAL SOUL: THE JURISPRUDENCE OF SAINT THOMAS MORE BRIAN M. MURRAYt INTRODUCTION Before Thomas More's life ended, he uttered the following famous last words: "'I die the king's good servant, and God's first.' "1 The phrase, while brief, is a window through which one can view More's philosophy, legal career, and service as a judge under the regime of King Henry VIII. Roughly twenty years earlier, More, in his finest and most widely known work, Utopia,2 advocated perseverance through prudence to public servants facing moral difficulty: "Don't give up the ship in a storm because you cannot direct the winds. [W]hat you cannot turn to good, you may at least-to the extent of your powers-make less bad."3 These lines, demonstrating the tension between serving in a system of imperfect human law while trying to remain the loyal servant of an unearthly yet divine kingdom, also serve as bookends for More's life and philosophy.
    [Show full text]