Comedy, Tragedy, and Saint Thomas More

Moreana ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (Number 176) (1) ◽  
pp. 143-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Foley

The twentieth-century political philosopher Leo Strauss uses a quotation from Thomas More to suggest that Christianity is akin to tragedy while philosophy is closer to comedy. This article responds to Strauss’s contention by examining the implications of characterizing philosophy or biblical religion as either comic or tragic; it then analyzes Thomas More’s understanding of Christianity in order to see whether More shares Strauss’s opinion. The paper concludes that he does not: Thomas More sees Christian life and thought as essentially “comic” in both structure and orientation.

2001 ◽  
Vol 30 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 353-363
Author(s):  
Grant Havers

Leo Strauss was one of the few political philosophers of the twentieth century to study the relation between faith and political philosophy. Yet Strauss's notoriously esoteric style has led scholars to wildly diverse interpretations of his views: his defenders believe that Strauss supports biblical religion as an instrument of truth and morality, while his critics contend that he opposes biblical religion for its biases while appreciating its political usefulness. I shall argue that Strauss is deeply opposed to the doctrines and political usage of biblical religion. For biblical doctrines clash with his theory of natural right, the latter being the basis of political stability, according to Strauss.


Author(s):  
Ryan Balot

This chapter evaluates the arguments and intentions of Leo Strauss’s most ambitious political text, Natural Right and History. Strauss’s stated purpose is to rehabilitate the ancient Greek and Roman conceptions of “natural right”—a term of art by which he referred to the justice inherent in the rational order of nature. His express motivation was to rebut the relativism and historicism that, in his view, characterized twentieth-century political thought. This chapter contends that the book’s core lies in its implicit presentation of philosophical inquiry as the highest human vocation. This idea is presented less through systematic argument than through Strauss’s own engagement with canonical political texts—an engagement designed to illustrate both the excitement and the fulfillment of philosophical dialogue. The political virtues, while defended on the surface of the text, remain as unsettled by the end as they were in the introduction.


Author(s):  
Karen B. Westerfield Tucker

From their emergence early in the twentieth century, the liturgical movement and the ecumenical movement, the latter particularly represented by the deliberations of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches, both called for and shaped ecumenical discourse on the nature of worship, the content and shape (ordo) of liturgy, sacraments and sacramentality, the practices of worship, and liturgical leadership and participation. This chapter highlights the history and contributions of both of these movements and notes the confluence of the two streams in the recognition of the centrality of worship for Christian life and mission. Attention also focuses on the ecumenical sharing of liturgical music, common liturgical texts, and lectionaries, and the ongoing question of ecumenical worship.


Author(s):  
Andrea Dara Cooper

Modern Jewish thought has been largely a masculine discursive space in both its historical construction and its focus, which is reflected in the makeup of its accepted canon. Certain figures are generally included in edited collections and syllabi of modern Jewish thought and philosophy. The field’s medieval and early modern antecedents include 12th-century scholar Moses Maimonides and 17th-century thinker Baruch Spinoza. The 18th-century German philosopher Moses Mendelssohn is generally viewed as the “father” of the field. Beginning with the 19th- and 20th-century German philosopher Hermann Cohen, prominent 20th-century figures include the following: German philosophers Franz Rosenzweig and Martin Buber; French-Lithuanian thinker Emmanuel Levinas; American thinkers Mordecai Kaplan, Joseph B. Soloveitchik, and Abraham Joshua Heschel; and post-Holocaust philosophers and theologians Emil Fackenheim, Richard Rubenstein, and Eliezer Berkovits. Other notable figures include founding Reform rabbi Abraham Geiger, Orthodox rabbis Samson Raphael Hirsch and Abraham Isaac Kook, political philosopher Leo Strauss, Israeli Orthodox thinker Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and American rabbi and philosopher Eugene Borowitz. Sometimes the political philosopher Hannah Arendt and feminist theologians such as Judith Plaskow are included, but the entirety of the canon is often male-dominated. Form tends to mirror content in the formation and maintenance of such canons. In these cases, male-dominated discourse, drawn from a network of male thinkers who operate in relation to one another, favors approaches that foreground and privilege the masculine. While this textual corpus has remained largely immune to critiques informed by gender and feminist analysis, important and groundbreaking contributions to the fields of gender and Jewish philosophy have been made. It is not simply a matter of adding women-identified and nonbinary voices to the canon (although any heterogeneity is preferable to none), but of attending to critiques informed by gender and feminist analysis in order to uncover viewpoints and frameworks that have been overlooked. This article includes sources that attend to this aim in a variety of ways and with differing methodologies: texts by women-identified writers and texts about women and gender (in many cases overlapping), texts that critically analyze the construction and preservation of sex and gender hierarchies, texts that uncover philosophical omissions by male-identified thinkers, and texts that philosophically reflect upon experiences and lived realities that have been largely neglected, including embodiment, emotion, affect, vulnerability, maternity, and a feminist ethics of care, among others. These interventions consider, among other foundational questions: Who is included or excluded from the canonical framework? What can contemporary theories of gender teach us about the use of gendered terms in Judaism? In what ways can feminist criticism identify the masculinist assumptions of texts and the hierarchical construction of masculinity and femininity? How does the historical construction of the field reflect exclusive social and political norms? These questions and demands can extend to the ways that we canonically (re)construct the field of modern Jewish thought. This article addresses developments and interventions in critical gender analysis in relation to modern Jewish thought, tracking these contributions in secondary literature to increase their visibility, with an eye to expanding the scope and inclusiveness of the canon in the future.


2019 ◽  
pp. 157-190
Author(s):  
J. Patrick Hornbeck

Chapter 5 takes as its starting point the premiere of Robert Bolt’s historical play about the life of Thomas More, A Man for All Seasons. It goes on to consider Wolsey’s representation in academic writings and influential historical fictions in the second half of the twentieth century and the first decades of the twenty-first. The chapter explores the five biographies of the cardinal that appeared during this period, discussing at the same time how Wolsey has been represented in the broader historiography of the early reign of Henry VIII. While revisionists of the 1980s and 1990s demonstrated little interest in Wolsey, their discoveries about the early English Reformation have shaped the most recent academic representations of the cardinal. At the same time, however, some of the most influential representations of Wolsey in the past half-century have been fictional. Therefore, the chapter also analyzes Bolt’s play, the controversial television drama The Tudors, and Hilary Mantel’s Wolf Hall novels.


Moreana ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (Number 209) (1) ◽  
pp. 61-78
Author(s):  
José Eduardo Reis

The history of the literary reception of Thomas More's Utopia in Portugal has been a tale of omissions, censorships and deferred translations that highlight a flaw within the Portuguese cultural system. Indeed, it is somewhat ironic that such a representative work of both Western literature and thought, historically associated with the opening of the world's geographical horizons, and which ascribed to a Portuguese sailor, Raphael Hythloday, the discovery of an ideal place, was first translated into Portuguese only in the second half of the twentieth century. However, the first decade of the twenty-first century seems to bode a more auspicious literary fortune for More's Utopia within the Portuguese literary idiom: not only has an edition of More's work finally been translated from the original Latin, but also two novels were published in 2004, A lenda de Martim Regos, by Pedro Canais, and Rafael, by Manuel Alegre. In the context of both books' plots, they rewrite the complex traits of the character of the Portuguese sailor and discoverer of the ideal island. The same reinvention of the character of Raphael had already been attempted, in 1998, by José V. de Pina Martins in his long dialogic Morean narrative, Utopia III. In this essay, I will focus both on the documental sources related to Portuguese culture that are at the root of More's Utopia and on some relevant aspects of the reception of the character of Raphael Hythloday within the aforementioned novels.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document