Utopia, ¿Stultifera Insula? Considerations Regarding the Judgement of a Detractor

Abstract

When addressing the topic of so-called “communism” in his pretentious and untimely Summa Philosophica, cardinal Tomasso Maria Zigliara (who was apparently a key author for  late nineteenth-century  Catholic  doctrine)  correctly identifies Thomas More’s famous Utopia as one of its most important predecessors and goes on to describe the main doctrine  of  the book  (i.e., the  replacement  of  private property for common property) as being “as impious as it is  foolish”  [non minus impia quam stulta]. Although  this “truly golden little book” certainly requires no defense, the charge brought up by the learned cardinal affords us an excellent opportunity to reflect on its significance and current relevance. For that purpose, I first try to clarify the meaning and scope of the terms of the accusation (almost a  full-fledged  condemnation)  by  showing  Zigliara’s reasons for considering that they apply to Utopia. Then, I try to offer a reply. However, my plea does not consist in claiming that More was undeserving of the charges of impiety and folly (or senselessness or even madness). Rather, I entertain the possibility that he may indeed be liable for those “crimes” and that is precisely where the highest merit and greatness of his thought resides.