life of john picus earl of mirandola - The Center for Thomas More ...

10 Thomas More’s Life of John Picus
before that, not a few famous doctors of divinity had approved as good
and clean, and subscribed their names under them¦. But he, not bearing
the loss of his fame, made a defence 1 for those thirteen questions, a
work of great erudition and elegant and stuffed with the cognition of
many things worthy to be learned. Which work he compiled in twenty
nights; in which it evidently appeareth, not only that those conclusions
were good and standing with the Faith, but also that they which had
barked at them were of folly and rudeness to be reproved. Which
defence, and all other things that he should write, he committed (like
a good Christian man) to the most holy judgment of our mother, holy
Church¦. Which defence received, and the thirteen questions¦ duly by
deliberation examined, our Holy Father the Pope¦ 2 approved Picus and
tenderly favoured him, as by a Bull of our Holy Father, Pope Alexander
VI, it plainly appeareth¦. But the book in which the whole nine
hundred questions with their conclusions were contained (forasmuch
as there were in them many things strange and not fully declared and
were more meet for secret communication of learned men than for
open hearing of common people, which for lack of cunning might take
hurt thereby), Picus desired himself that it should not be read.¦ And
so was the reading thereof forbidden. 3 ⌐ Lo, this end had Picus 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. ¬
¦ 2 Here More omits six lines of Latin in which is described Buonfrancesco, bishop of Reggio,
who is praised for his “wide-ranging learning...penetrating judgement...and his solid character”
(CW 1:301). / 11 More omits eiusque praesidis, here meaning “and the pope” (CW 1:300, 301).
After this More omits a brief passage explaining Picus’ reason for submitting his Apologia to the
Church and the pope. / More omits quae prius calumniis infestatae fuerant, “which had formerly
been slanderously attacked” (CW 1:300, 301). / 12 More omits “Innocent VIII.” / 14 More
omits a passage explaining that the text of the bull was printed together with the text of Picus’
Apologia in Opera omnia. He also omits that Picus “earnestly begged friends and enemies alike,
learned and unlearned, to read the [Apologia] but to leave unread the pamphlet containing those
unqualified conclusions...” (CW 1:303). / 19 More paraphrases several lines of the Latin text;
while conveying the general sense of the original, one conspicuous omission is the fact that Pope
Innocent VIII explicitly forbade the reading of Picus’ Conclusiones.
1. defence: Picus’ Apologia conclusionum suarum, completed 31 May 1487.
2. With the omission of “Innocent VIII” More’s syntax seems to imply he is speaking not of
Innocent VIII but of Alexander VI , the later pope who in fact did not issue the bull for Picus’
absolution until 18 June 1493.
3. Picus officially retracted his Conclusiones in July 1487; Pope Innocent VIII ordered their supression.
5
10
15
20