Williams 1

Erika Williams

GBKS 304

3/13/18

Utopia: The Case for a Republic Led by Religion

Utopia by Thomas More presents the idea of a perfect society through fictional characters

and experiences. The society that is presented heavily relies on its people and encourages

community ownership and usefulness. The Utopian society is very unusual from other proposed

“perfect” societies in that it is heavily reliant on principles such as virtue and a natural desire to

do what is morally right. These principles fall directly in line with religious values and (even

more specifically) Christianity, which are referenced throughout the novel. This seems to imply

that Utopia and its society are a representation of and argument for a perfect society that is

based/founded on religious virtues and ideas.

The religious basis of the Utopian society can first be seen in book one of Utopia. Book

one of the novel details the conversation and debate between Thomas More, Peter Gillies, and

Raphael Nonsenso (who is a fan of Utopia and its ideals). The three men talk of current issues

such as the punishment of thieves and the need for money by the king and Raphael discusses his

ideas and solutions for them. While doing this, Raphael uses the land of Utopia to provide a basis

for his ideas and to act as an example as to how and why they work. Throughout his reasonings,

rebuttals, and descriptions of Utopia, he brings up several religious principles and verses to aid

his defense. While discussing the theft and punishment issue, Raphael states, “God said, “Thou

shalt not kill” – does the theft of a little money make it quite alright for us to do so? … Isn’t that

rather like saying that this particular commandment has no more validity than human laws allow
 Williams 2

it?” (More 50). In this line, Raphael (and ultimately More) is directly criticizing the English and

European society for their misuse and manipulation of Christian ethics in a Christian country. He

even goes as far as to contrast the penalty of thieves proposed to the penalty that was presented

in Moses’ time (More 50). Not only does the quote and contrasting example act as a direct

reference to religion and its perceived proper place in society, it also purposefully foreshadows

principles that are later described in the Utopian society (where Raphael derives most of his

ideas from). This overall criticism and active display of religion in society works to show that

Utopia and its religious function are fundamentally better than systems that pretend to follow

religious doctrines or don’t do so at all. Therefore, this idea serves as a kind of thesis statement

for the second book of Utopia in which the perfect system is used as a subtle argument for the

implementation of religion in republic systems.

References to religious principles and virtues are more directly related to the workings of

republics and systems throughout book two. Book two ultimately lays out all of Utopia’s

workings and goes into detail about what makes the society so perfect and efficient. There are

several direct parallels made between religion and the detailed workings of Utopian society that

work to bring Utopia’s success and the principles of religion (as a whole) even closer together.

During his detailed description of Utopia, Raphael discusses virtue, pleasure, and happiness in

relation to the people of the island and how they find fulfillment in a system that is against

private property and non-productive/non-beneficial actions. Raphael directly states that they

draw their doctrines of happiness and pleasure straight from religion (More 91). He states that

“They [the Utopians] argue that pleasure is the ultimate happiness which all human beings have

in view, even when they are acting most virtuously.”. Right after this statement, he defines

pleasure for Utopians as, “. . . any state or activity, physical or mental, which is naturally
 Williams 3

enjoyable” and stresses that the focus of the definition is the term “naturally”. Finally, after

detailing specific kinds of pleasure, he defines natural pleasures as “any natural way which

doesn’t hurt other people, interfere with greater pleasures, or cause unpleasant after affects”

(More 93). By putting these definitions together, it can be deduced that happiness for Utopians

(who represent a kind of uncorrupted society of people) comes from doing things that they can

purely and genuinely enjoy that are also universally virtuous and beneficial. This falls directly in

line with definitions of true happiness and virtuous pleasure under religious doctrines. More

specifically, it seems to display a general belief in enjoying the things that are naturally given to

one and not searching for pleasures and happiness elsewhere. This general concept of happiness

displays a knowledge and belief of a kind of higher power that allows them to enjoy things as

long as it is within the naturally good natured and moral design. This makes the Utopian people a

primary example of a naturally moral and uncorrupt society of people that can function and

thrive on religious principles of living.

The description of the functions and people of Utopia appear to heavily imply that the

island runs specifically and strictly on a specific religious belief system. The Utopian religious

belief system is even discussed in terms of Christianity and Christian terminology in the

conversation between the Europeans. However, it is revealed that Utopians are granted religious

freedom and are able (and encouraged) to learn about different theologies and ways of life in

order to decide for themselves. The Utopians are permitted to practice whatever religion they

want as long as it compatible with human dignity and includes the belief of a kind of afterlife (in

which the soul does not die with the body) and a guiding force in the universe. The question that

arises from a system that is based on religion and also permits such freedom is how it can

function and thrive without falling apart due to various views and beliefs? Though religious
 Williams 4

freedom is a common and provenly successful doctrine to have in a society, it seems as though a

society based on religion would need to follow a specific denomination to prevent dividing

conflict. Nevertheless, this is not an issue in Utopia and the basic requirements for a practiced

religion are both broad and specific enough to prevent any denominational clashes. A common

basis for religions in general is to believe in some kind of higher power or force that determines

what one is to do and how they are to behave in creation. It is also common basis for religions to

have a kind of afterlife (or consequence for their soul) and dignity towards humans, which are

creations of the higher power that are to be respected. This broadness of the religious regulations

is put in place to combine the perfect religion based society with the freedom and welcoming

nature that attracts people to republics, while also keeping current citizens happy and able to

express themselves.

Overall, Utopia is a novel that pushes the boundaries and puts the idea of a functional and

thriving society based on religious principles to the test. The book in question works to challenge

previously standing ideas of successful systems that are based off of immoral, unvirtuous, and

unethical means to an operational and “successful” republic. Even though More does go on in his

own novel to refute some ideas and regulations of this fictional city, he does so to re-anchor the

novel into reality and display an understanding of the limits that things such as true human nature

and the inability to please and have everything provide. On a broader and, possibly, more

abstract sense, Utopia also acts as a work of religious criticism due to its highlighting of and

possible basis in the corrupt and unvirtuous workings of republics that claim religious principles

and merit. Utopia’s fictional context allows the ideas and criticisms to be, not only more freely

expressed, but also more liberally explored in the time period. In the end, it seems that More’s
 Williams 5

overall purpose was to explore the extreme in order to find and encourage alternate ways of

thinking to try and better his own society and other European systems.