Again the great object of the social economy of Utopia was not to increase the abundance of luxuries, or to amass a vast accumulation in few hands, or even in national or royal hands, but to lessen the hours of labor to the workingman. By spreading the burden of labor more evenly over the whole community,—by taking care that there should be no idle classes, be they beggars or begging friars, More expressed the opinion that the hours of labor to the workingman might probably be reduced to six.

Again: living himself in Bucklersbury, in the midst of all the dirt and filth of London's narrow streets; surrounded by the unclean, ill-ventilated houses of the poor, whose floors of clay and rushes, never cleansed, were pointed out by Erasmus as breeding pestilence and inviting the ravages of the sweating sickness; himself a commissioner of sewers, and having thus some practical knowledge of London's sanitary arrangements, More described the towns of Utopia as well and regularly built, with wide streets, waterworks, hospitals, and numerous common halls; all the houses well protected from the weather, as nearly as might be fireproof, three stories high, with plenty of windows, and doors both front and back, the back door always opening into a well-kept garden. All this was Utopian, doubtless, and the result in Utopia of the still more Utopian abolition of private property; but the gist and the point of it consisted in the contrast it presented with what he saw around him in Europe, and especially in England, and men could hardly fail to draw the lesson he intended to teach.

It will not be necessary here to dwell further upon the details of the social arrangements of More's ideal commonwealth, or to enter at length upon the philosophical opinions of the Utopians; but a word or two will be needful to point out the connection of the latter with the views of that little band of friends whose joint history I am here trying to trace.

§8. The Religion of Utopia Broad and Tolerant

From his expression of a fearless faith in the consistency of Christianity with science, it might be inferred that More would represent the religion of the Utopians as at once broad and tolerant. It could not logically be otherwise. The Utopians, we are told, differed very widely; but notwithstanding all their different objects of worship, they agreed in thinking that there is one Supreme Being who made and governs the world. By the exigencies of the romance, the Christian religion had only been recently introduced into

the island. It existed there side by side with other and older religions, and hence the difficulties of complete toleration in Utopia were much greater hypothetically than they would be in any European country. Still, sharing Colet's hatred of persecution, More represented that it was one of the oldest laws of Utopia "that no man is to be punished for his religion." Every one might be of any religion he pleased, and might use argument to induce others to accept it. It was only when men resorted to other force than that of persuasion, using reproaches and violence, that they were banished from Utopia; and then, not on account of their religion, and irrespective of whether their religion were true or false, but for sowing sedition and creating a tumult.

This law Utopus founded to preserve the public peace, and for the interests of religion itself. Supposing only one religion to be true and the rest false (which he dare not rashly assert), Utopus had faith that in the long run the innate force of truth would prevail, if supported only by fair argument, and not damaged by resort to violence and tumult.. Thus, he did not punish even avowed atheists, although he considered them unfit for any public trust.

Their priests were very few in number of either sex, and, like all their other magistrates, elected by ballot (suffragiis occultis); and it was a point of dispute even with the Utopian Christians, whether they could not elect their own Christian priests in like manner, and qualify them to perform all priestly offices, without any apostolic succession or authority from the pope. Their priests were, in fact, rather conductors of the public worship, inspectors of the public morals, and ministers of education than "priests" in any sacerdotal sense of the word. Thus whilst representing confession as in common use amongst Utopians, More significantly described them as confessing not to the priests but to the heads of families. Whilst also, as in Europe, such was the respect shown them that they were not amenable to the civil tribunals, it was said to be on account of the extreme fewness of their number, and the high character secured by their mode of election, that no great inconvenience resulted from this exemption in Utopian practice.

If the diversity of religions in Utopia made it more difficult to suppose perfect toleration, and thus made the contrast between Utopian and European practice in this respect all the more telling, so also was this the case in respect to the conduct of public worship.

The hatred of the Oxford Reformers for the endless dissensions of European Christians; the advice Colet was wont to give to theological students, "to keep to the Bible and the Apostles' Creed,

and let divines, if they like, dispute about the rest"; the appeal of Erasmus to Servatius, whether it would not be better for "all Christendom to be regarded as one monastery, and all Christians as belonging to the same religious brotherhood," - all pointed, if directed to the practical question of public worship, to a mode of worship in which all of every shade of sentiment could unite.

This might be a dream even then, while as yet Christendom was nominally united in one Catholic Church; and still more practically impossible in a country like Utopia, where men worshipped the Supreme Being under different symbols and different names, as it might be now even in a Protestant country like England, where religion seems to be the source of social divisions and castes rather than a tie of brotherhood, separating men in their education, in their social life, and even in their graves, by the hard line of sectarian difference. It might be a dream, but it was one worth a place in the dreamland of More's ideal commonwealth.

Temples, nobly built and spacious, in whose solemn twilight men of all sects meet, in spite of their distinctions, to unite in a public worship avowedly so arranged that nothing may be seen or heard which shall jar with the feelings of any class of the worshippers nothing in which all cannot unite (for every sect performs its own peculiarites in private): no images, so that every one may represent the Deity to his own thoughts in his own way; no forms of prayer, but such as every one may use without prejudice to his own private opinion- a service so expressive of their common brotherhood that they think it a great impiety to enter upon it with a consciousness of anger or hatred to any one, without having first purified their hearts and reconciled every difference; incense and other sweet odors and waxen lights burned, not from any notion that they can confer any benefit on God, which even men's prayers cannot, but because they are useful aids to the worshippers; the men occupying one side of the temple, the women the other, and all clothed in white; the whole people rising as the priest who conducts the worship enters the temple in his beautiful vestments, wonderfully wrought of birds' plumage, to join in hymns of praise, accompanied by music; then priest and people uniting in solemn prayer to God in a set form of words, so composed that each can apply its meaning to himself, offering thanks for the blessings which surround them, for the happiness of their commonwealth, for their having embraced a religious persuasion which they hope is the most true one; praying that if they are mistaken they may be led to what is really the true one, so that all

may be brought to unity of faith and practice, unless in his inscrutable will the Almighty should otherwise ordain; and concluding with a prayer that, as soon as it may please Him, He may take them to Himself; lastly, this prayer concluded, the whole congregation bowing solemnly to the ground, and then, after a short pause, separating to spend the remainder of the day in innocent amusement - this was More's idea of public worship!

Such was the second book of the Utopia, probably written by More whilst on the embassy, toward the close of 1515, or soon after his return. Well might he conclude with the words, "I freely confess that many things in the commonwealth of Utopia I rather wish than hope to see adopted in our own!"

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

Froude, Life and Letters of Erasmus. Nichols, The Epistles of Erasmus. Emerton, Erasmus, especially the chapters relating to his life in England. Gasquet, Eve of the Reformation, chap. vi on Erasmus, chap. ii on the revival of letters, and chap. viii on the English Bible. Roper, Life of Sir Thomas More. Lupton, Life of Dean Colet. Einstein, The Italian Renaissance in England, Columbia University Press. The Cambridge Modern History, Vol. I, chap. xvi for the classical Renaissance; chap. xvii for the Christian Renaissance.

CHAPTER II

ON THE EVE OF THE SEPARATION FROM ROME

THE state of religious opinion in England on the eve of the separation of the English Church from Roman authority is exceedingly difficult to determine. It is very hard, indeed, to state even the problems to be solved in the ascertainment of that condition. There is no way of knowing the number of men who were dissatisfied with the Church or its doctrines. It is often claimed, however, that the Church was steadily declining in authority, and that the growing dissatisfaction with the prevailing ecclesiastical policy would have soon broken England away from the Roman communion even if Henry VIII had not found an excuse for a quick and violent severance of the ancient ties. This view is given in the famous History of England by Mr. Froude, from which this extract is taken. An examination of the footnotes cited in the original volume itself gives an interesting insight into the nature of the evidence for the conclusions and into the methods employed by the author.

1. Changes Since the Day of Henry II1

Times were changed in England since the second Henry walked barefoot through the streets of Canterbury, and knelt while the monks flogged him on the pavement in the Chapterhouse, doing penance for Becket's murder. The clergy had won the battle in the twelfth century because they deserved to win it. They were not free from fault and weakness, but they felt the meaning of their profession. Their hearts were in their vows; their authority was exercised more justly, more nobly, than the authority of the crown; and therefore, with inevitable justice, the crown was compelled to stoop before them. The victory was great; but, like many victories, it was fatal to the conquerors. It filled them full with the 1 Froude, History of England, Vol. I, chap. ii.