Did St Thomas More call a 'Christian Hermeticist' a 'perfect philosopher and theologian'?
Sebastian Morello tells us that the beloved martyr St Thomas More described Pico Della Mirandola as 'a perfect philosopher and a perfect theologian.' But is it true?
Sebastian Morello tells us that the beloved martyr St Thomas More described Pico Della Mirandola as 'a perfect philosopher and a perfect theologian.' But is it true?
(WM Round-Up) – In the recent dispute over Sebastian Morello’s book Mysticism, Magic and Monasteries, we had previously noted the following passage:
Those who know me, know that I have long harboured esoteric interests. When I taught at a catechetical institute in London, I was always accompanied by my whippet Pico, named after the fifteenth-century Christian Hermeticist Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, a man whom St. Thomas More described as “a perfect philosopher and a perfect theologian.” The name which I affectionately bestowed upon my familiar was partly to signal to the initiated that I too was a lover of the Secret Fire.
In addition, Morello starts the chapters of his book The World as God’s Icon with texts from Pico.
The purpose of citing St Thomas More seems clear: to silence those who might wish to raise concern about the idea of what Morello calls a “Christian Hermeticist”—as well as, we presume, about affectionately naming ones “familiar” after one.
After all, who are we to disagree with such a beloved martyr as St Thomas More, also distinguished for his own learning and piety?
At the time of writing the previous piece, we made the following comment:
Notwithstanding the qualities which led to St Thomas More’s praise, Pico’s book (even if not his person) was condemned by the Church.
“But perhaps,” we might be tempted to wonder, “perhaps Rome made a mistake in condemning Pico’s doctrine.”
However, having followed up some of these matters since, we are tentatively able to say that St Thomas More said nothing of the sort about Pico.
Here are the facts.
The Biography of Pico was not by More
In 1510, aged 32, More translated the biography of Pico (1463-1494), written by Pico’s nephew Giovanni Francesco Pico dell Mirandola. He translated it for one Joyce Leigh, whose identity is uncertain1 but who, according to Yale University’s Essential Works of Thomas More, was a nun.2
The words “perfect philosopher and a perfect divine [theologian]” comes from this biography. They are not More’s own words. We have not been able to verify whether he “made these words his own” at a later date.
In his book, Morello cites the edition published by Opus Dei-affiliated Scepter Publishing, which does seem to present it as the work of More himself.3 However, this is extremely misleading, as demonstrated by Morello himself having been misled. Such a mistake might be understandable if one has only made a cursory reading of the work, but it should be corrected.
The complexity of the relevant texts
Immediately following these words, however, Pico’s nephew paints his uncle in rather less flattering terms:
⌐Of His Mind and Vainglorious Dispicions [Disputations] at Rome¬ Now had he been seven years conversant in these studies when, ⌐full of pride, and desirous of glory and man’s praise¬ (for yet was he not kindled in the love of God), he went to Rome, and there (coveting to make a show of his cunning and little considering how great envy he should raise against himself ), nine hundred questions he purposed of diverse and sundry matters […]4
This book of 900 propositions was eventually condemned by Pope Innocent VIII.
We should also note that the Essential Works’ half-brackets indicate More’s own additions, at least according to its editors.5
The Foreword to the Life of Pico in the Essential Works also contains the following, which may further indicate that Morello’s presentation of More’s attitude to Pico may be misleading:
“While early biographers Thomas Stapleton and Cresacre More have claimed that the young More found in Pico a model or pattern for the layman, More’s Life is considerably more ambiguous in its presentation and probing of Pico’s character.
“One can imagine other models of living, for example, than a precocious intellectual who dies prematurely and ends in the “dark fire” of purgatory, at least according to the testimony of Pico’s most controversial advisor, Savonarola, whom More leaves unnamed but Gianfrancesco highly praised.6 The combination of admiration and ambivalence, irony and adulation, makes More’s Life a challenging portrait to judge.”7
Intriguing omissions on Kabbalah
Further evidence of these difficulties appears in a significant omission made by More in his translation, brought to our attention by Thomas Mirus of Catholic Culture:
More actually removed a reference to Kabala from the Life of Pico in his translation.8
In fact, More removed more than a reference to Kabbalah in this section. Here is a direct translation from the Latin, with the omitted, paraphrased or substantially different passages in bold:
Nine hundred questions he proposed on dialectical, mathematical, natural, and divine matters—not only drawn from the shelves of the Latins and the archives of the Greeks, but also unearthed from the mysteries of the Hebrews, sought out from the secrets of the Chaldeans, and traced in the writings of the Arabs.
He further interwove into those questions many things concerning the ancient and obscure philosophy of Pythagoras, Hermes Trismegistus, and Orpheus; many also concerning the Kabbalah—that is, the secret reception of Hebrew doctrines—which, among our own writers, Origen and Hilary especially are known to have drawn upon. He included much as well concerning natural magic, which he taught ought to be distinguished by no small interval from impious and wicked magic—a point he demonstrated most elegantly, as the testimony of many attests.
Nor were there lacking seventy-two new doctrines in physics and metaphysics, of his own devising and reflection, devised to elucidate all manner of philosophical questions. To these he annexed a new method of philosophising by means of numbers, and he posted all of them together in public places, that they might the more readily be made known, offering to cover the expenses of those who should come to Rome from distant lands for the sake of disputation.9
Compare this with More’s translation, with the paraphrases in bold:
… nine hundred questions he purposed of diverse and sundry matters, as well in logic and philosophy as divinity, with great study picked and sought out as well of the Latin authors as the Greeks, and partly fetched out of the secret mysteries of the Hebrews, Chaldeans, and Arabians, and many things drawn out of the old obscure philosophy of Pythagoras, Trismegistus, and Orpheus, and many other things strange and to all folk (except right few special excellent men) before that day not unknown only, but also unheard of.
All which questions in open places (that they might be to all people the better known) he fastened and set up, offering also himself to bear the costs of all such as would come thither out of far countries to dispute.10
In addition the section referring to Kabbalah, More omits reference to Pico’s interest in “natural magic,” its alleged distinction from “impious and wicked magic,” and his alleged successful demonstration of this distinction.
Similarly, More omits the section referring to Gematria, the Kabbalist “method of philosophising by means of numbers,” as the Latin puts it.
These omissions, of matters closely related to various forms of Hermeticism, make it difficult and simplistic to present More's work as praise of Pico as a “Christian Hermeticist.”
Another point here is that More’s words “right few special excellent men” might, on first glance, appear to be a praise of Renaissance adepts of the “strange” doctrines in Pico’s book; but with the context of the Latin, this rather seems to be a more prosaic (and plausible) reference to Origen and St Hilary.
Kabbalah was a crucial aspect of Pico’s book, and is related to Hermeticism in some significant ways. Those interested in a thorough Catholic critique of Kabbalah will find it at
on Substack, with this video as a starting point:Timings
But why did More translate this biography at all?
St Thomas More was a “Humanist” (in the Renaissance sense) and an advocate for the “new learning” of the day—in which Pico excelled
As noted, some writers have suggested that More translated the biography because he admired Pico’s learning and genius—although both the original and the translation indicate an awareness of other, less admirable qualities in the man.
Mirus also suggests the following, which says will be developed in an upcoming article:
Much of his interest in Pico as a young man seems to have been because Pico was a lay theologian, and this example helped either confirm or comfort St. Thomas in his decision to leave his monastery and start a family.11
However, let's place the Life of Pico in the context of More's other published material. As mentioned, he made his translation in 1510, at the age of 32. Around the same time, he completed translations of Lucian, wrote a political history of King Richard III, as well as his satirical political work Utopia. His work seems to be focused around humanism and a defence of the new learning.
There is no indication that he ever repudiated the work later in life. However, we should note that both this work, and the other works mentioned, preceded Luther’s “Ninety-Five Theses”—often taken as the start of the Reformation—by seven years.
Almost immediately after the Reformation might be said to begin, his published works take a decisive new turn. Consider the chronological list12:
Pre-Luther Works
1496-1504 English Poems
1499-1535 Correspondence (Latin and English)
c. 1500 Latin verses to Holt’s Lac Puerorum
c. 1504 Letter to John Colet
1510 The Life of John Picus
1506 Translations of Lucian
1496-1516 published 1518 Latin Poems 1509 “Coronation Ode”
1513 Epigrams on Brixius
c. 1513-1318 The History of King Richard III
1515 Letter to Dorp
1516 Utopia
Post-Luther Works
1517-1522 Poems and letters to his children, and letter to their tutor
1518-1520 Letters to Oxford (1518—defence of the study of Greek), to a Monk (1519—defence of Erasmus), and to Brixius (1520—defence of the new learning)
c. 1522 Quattuor Novissima [The Four Last Things]
1523 Responsio ad Lutherum
1526 published 1568 Letter to Bugenhagen (Defends the Church against Luthernaism)
June 1529 A Dialogue Concerning Heresies
September 1529 Supplication of Souls (Defence of Purgatory)
May 1531 A Dialogue Concerning Heresies, 2nd edition
March 1532 Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer I-III
Dec., 1533 Letter against Frith (Defends the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist)
Spring 1533 Confutation of Tyndale IV-VIII
April 1533 The Apology of Sir Thomas More (Deals with his treatment of heretics, and various Reformation matters)
October 1533 The Debellation of Salem and Bizance (A defence of the rights of the Church)
December 1533 The Answer to a Poisoned Book (On the Mass)
1534 A Treatise upon the Passion; A Treatise to Receive the Blessed Body; A Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation; “A Dialogue on Conscience”
1534-1535 “Imploring Divine Help against Temptation”; “A Godly Instruction [on How to Treat Those Who Wrong Us]”; “A Godly Meditation [on Detachment]”
1535 De Tristitia Christi [The Sadness of Christ]
July 1535 “A Devout Prayer [before Dying]”
Although he maintains his humour (sometimes uproariously so) and interest in the new learning throughout these works, his purpose is clear and single-minded.
We have been unable to find a reference to Pico in the writings from this second period. There may be various reasons why More had no time for Pico in this “post-Luther” period.
One is that, sobered by the rise of Lutheranism and the Reformation, the constraints on More’s already limited time13 forced him to focus on what he considered truly important: the defence of the Catholic Church.
Another is that this rebellion against Christ’s Church may have made Pico—whose book was condemned, even while he was exonerated—a less sympathetic, exciting or attractive subject than before, even if he personally had become a virtuous and humble man, and who died well enough.
This may be addressed more fully at a later date.
Conclusion
Let us return to the paragraph with which we began:
Those who know me, know that I have long harboured esoteric interests. When I taught at a catechetical institute in London, I was always accompanied by my whippet Pico, named after the fifteenth-century Christian Hermeticist Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, a man whom St. Thomas More described as “a perfect philosopher and a perfect theologian.” The name which I affectionately bestowed upon my familiar was partly to signal to the initiated that I too was a lover of the Secret Fire.
As we have seen, the invocation of Saint Thomas More serves a clear rhetorical purpose: to clothe Giovanni Pico della Mirandola in the borrowed prestige of one of England’s most beloved saints. This prestige is then used to deflect criticism—not only of Pico’s controversial status, but also of the ideas that Morello and fellow travellers promote.
Yet this prestige is borrowed under false pretences. The phrase “a perfect philosopher and a perfect theologian” is not More’s. It appears in a biography written by Pico’s nephew, translated by More in his early humanist years. It is difficult to ascertain More’s own view of it. The translation itself includes editorial signals that complicate any attempt to present it as a simple endorsement.
More does not seem to have returned to the subject in his later writings, which were focused increasingly on defending the Church against Protestant errors. Nor does he seem to have mentioned Pico after that time. These facts should give pause to anyone tempted to press his early translation into service as a moral endorsement of “Christian Hermeticism.”
This article does not pretend to resolve the legacy of Pico, nor to critique Morello’s project as a whole. It simply aims to set the record straight: Saint Thomas More did not say what Morello claims he did.
To suggest otherwise, without further evidence, is misleading. If he has such further evidence, then we welcome it; although this seems unlikely, given the initial citation of Scepter’s edition.
However, Morello is right about one thing in his second reply to
: Pico was an extremely complicated figure. But in this case, the effort to popularise him to a modern Catholic audience seems both unnecessary and imprudent—as do crude efforts to enlist St Thomas More as patron and rhetorical shield.HELP KEEP THE WM REVIEW ONLINE WITH WM+!
As we expand The WM Review we would like to keep providing free articles for everyone.
Our work takes a lot of time and effort to produce. If you have benefitted from it please do consider supporting us financially.
A subscription gets you access to our exclusive WM+ material, and helps ensure that we can keep writing and sharing free material for all.
(We make our WM+ material freely available to clergy, priests and seminarians upon request. Please subscribe and reply to the email if this applies to you.)
Subscribe to WM+ now to make sure you always receive our material. Thank you!
Read Next:
Observations on the Influence of the Occult in Traditional Catholic Discourse
Follow on Twitter, YouTube and Telegram:
The Life of Pico Della Mirandola, By his Nephew Giovanni Pico Della Mirandola, Trans. Thomas More, Ed. J.M. Rigg. Ex-classics Project, 2011, 77. Available here.
The Essential Works of Thomas More, Ed. Gerard B. Wegemer and Stephen W. Smith. Yale University Press, London, 2020, 61.
Essential Works, 65.
That said, we have found a Latin version of the life which contains the critical remarks from the body of the text, with the exception of “pride.”
“Iamque septennium apud illos versatus erat quando humanae laudis et gloriae cupidus, (nondum enim divino amore caluerat, ut palam fiet)”
More also added the words, which do not appear in the Latin: “⌐Lo, this end had Pico of his high mind and proud purpose: that where he thought to have gotten perpetual praise, there had he much work to keep himself upright, that he ran not in perpetual infamy and slander.¬”
The life also ends with an account of Pico appearing in a vision “all compassed in fire,” which was revealed to be “the dark fire of purgatory,” where he was punished for “his negligence” (which More added) “and his unkindness.”
Essential Works, 73.
Essential Works, 61. It continues:
Throughout More’s later writings, he will continue his consideration of prominent intellectual figures and their varying works. More’s Pico is the first in a series of portraits that will grow to include: Raphael Hythloday in Utopia; the lawyers and theological doctors in The History of King Richard the Third; Martin Luther, William Tyndale, and John Frith; the Messenger from A Dialogue of Sir Thomas More, Knight; his own daughter, Margaret Roper (Letter 206); and the interlocutors of A Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation.
Iamque septennium apud illos versatus erat quando humanae laudis et gloriae cupidus, (nondum enim divino amore caluerat, ut palam fiet) Roman migravit, inibique ostentare cupiens quanta eum a summissoribus in posterum maneret invidia, nongentas de dialecticis et mathematicis de naturalibus divinisque rebus quaestiones proposuit, non modo ex latinorum petitas archulis, graecorumque excerptas scriniis, sed ex hebraeorum etiam mysteriis erutas, chaldeorumque arcanis atque arabum vestigatas. Multa item de Pythagorae, Trimegistique et Orphei, prisca et suboscura Philosophia, multa de Cabala, hoc est secreta Hebraeorum dogmatum receptione, cuius et Origines et Hilarius e nostris potissimum comminiscuntur, quaestionibus illis intexuit, multa et de naturali Magia, quam non parvo interstitio ab impia et scelesta separari edocuit, idque multorum testimonio elegantissime comprobavit. Nec duo et septuaginta nova dogmata physica et metaphysica propria inventa et meditata ad quascumque philosophiae quaestiones elucidandas accomodata defuerunt; his novam per numeros philosophandi institutionem annexuit, cunctaque simul publicis locis, quo facilius vulgarentur, affixit, pollicitus se soluturum eis impensas, qui ex remotis oris disceptandi gratia Roman se contulissent.
Essential Works 66
“But nevertheless, even to perform this trifling task, other chores left me almost no time at all. I am constantly pleading one case, hearing another, acting as arbitrator, handing down decisions as a judge, visiting one person or another on business or because it is my duty to do so; I am out practically all day dealing with others, and the rest of my time is devoted to my family, and so I leave nothing for myself, that is for writing.
“When I get home, I have to talk with my wife, chat with my children, confer with the servants. All this I count as part of my obligations, since it needs to be done (and it does if you do not wish to be a stranger in your own home); and you must do everything you can to make yourself as agreeable as possible to the persons you live with, whether they were provided by nature, chance, or your own choice, as long as you do not spoil them by your familiarity or turn servants into masters through over- indulgence. As I am doing such things, as I said, a day, a month, a year slips by.
“When do I write then? And as yet I have said nothing about sleep and nothing at all about eating, and for many that takes up no less time than sleep itself, which consumes almost half our lives. The only time I get for myself is what I steal from sleep and eating.” P 153, 5.
A well reasoned and a learned defense. Sir Thomas More would be proud! And is happy to be saved from the Necromancers.
If Morello can't grasp that the passage in question is NOT St. Thomas More's, but was translated from another source, then Morello's credibility is suspect...