Octavia Ratiu
Staff Writer
THE MISSION of the 2007 Catholic Culture Series is to decipher the enigma and controversy surrounding Shakespeare’s Catholicism. Most recently, Professor John Finnis, of the Notre Dame Law School and Oxford University, soothed the campus, previously abuzz with unanswered questions about the British Bard.
Instead of beginning with the usual introductory fluff, Finnis dove right into his lecture, titled “The Audacity of Shakespeare’s Non-Recusant Catholicism,” handing out an article that he co-authored on Shakespeare’s poem “The Phoenix and the Turtle.” Finnis argues that the poem is primarily about several fervent and prominent Catholics of Shakespeare’s time.
“What we’ve offered is a completely new interpretation,” Finnis boldly stated in a soft and distinguished British accent. Indeed they have succeeded. Finnis claimed that the last line, “For these dead Birds, sigh a prayer,” was a clear sign to Elizabethan readers of the poem’s Catholicism. To “sigh a prayer” at a funeral was apparently Catholic superstition, and as such, never to be attempted by any rational British Anglican.
Finnis moved along to discuss Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure, a play “dedicated to the themes of chastity, sex, and fecundity,” as Finnis put it. Not only does Shakespeare “put its Catholic religious professionals in a good light,” Finnis said, “[but] the villain is repeatedly insinuated to be a Puritan.” As if this wasn’t enough to prove its Catholic essence, Measure for Measure espouses the very Catholic doctrine that even if one does something wrong unintentionally, eternal damnation nevertheless lies ahead.
Finnis finally touched on the eternal favorite amongst Shakespeare’s works, A Midsummer Night’s Dream. He led the audience through an elegant maze of evidence hinting at the play’s Catholic undertones, starting with its very title. “Midsummer” was originally spelled “Midsomer,” which points a blatant finger at Edward Somerset, the same Earl of Worcester mentioned in “The Phoenix and the Turtle.”
As he continued on with the references and reluctantly refrained from citing more due to time restriction, a tangible sense of enlightenment enveloped the room.
Yes, Shakespeare was raised Catholic. Does this mean he was Catholic? No. Does Shakespeare’s frequent association with plainly Catholic circles demonstrate his Catholicism? Maybe. Is there a distinct Catholic ethos in his works? An even stronger maybe.
The Rover had the opportunity to interview Professor Finnis after the lecture.
Octavia Ratiu: Given your esteemed academic career... you chose to teach at Notre Dame twelve years ago. What lead to this decision, why Notre Dame?
John Finnis: Well, I have been teaching for many years at a secular university and that has its advantages but it also has its disadvantages…there are topics that you can’t treat in ways you’d like to—and can—in an environment of Catholic students interested in the sorts of issues that get raised directly in secular environments.
OR: Given the different interpretations of Shakespeare, why is it so important for us to understand the nature of Shakespeare’s Catholicism? If indeed he was…
JF: Well, if he’s Catholic and if he wanted to express that in his works, then how sad it would be to miss out on what the playwright—the man of genius—intends to put in his work. That’s just a sort of self-evident loss.
OR: Thomas Aquinas is a large component of your work and teaching, and you just now delivered an intriguing lecture on Shakespeare. If Shakespeare and Thomas Aquinas were to meet, what would they talk about? Would they get along?
JF: Who knows? I mean, the character of both of them is extremely…in the background. Each of these men is very distinctive in—so to speak—submerging their own personality in the work that they put forward…Then again, so is everybody else. So, it’s particularly difficult to know anything about matters like that question which partly depends on their personality….Each side would have to make some adjustments to get into the other’s conceptual frame; and yet, the extent to which this continuity [extends] between the thought of Aquinas and the thought of Shakespeare and modern analysis—that continuity is far greater than the continuity between, say, Martin Luther and modern analysis. So all the more so, Shakespeare being several centuries closer to Aquinas than we are, Shakespeare being much more philosophically-minded than most people understand, much more logical and sophisticated than the usual…They’d be meeting on the same plane of genius.
Octavia Ratiu is a freshman potential Philosophy/ALPP major. Contact Octavia at oratiu@nd.edu.
| 
