The Weekly Sage hopes to regularly bring brief profiles of key contributors to thought and faith before a Christian audience for historical education and awareness of valuable resources.

John of Salisbury

–          “I have seen during my time numerous men meddling with sacred offices and rashly setting them upon their shoulders…I have seen others who consign the books of the law to the flames and are not afraid to tear them apart if the laws or canons fall into their hands. During the time of King Stephen the Roman laws were ordered from the kingdom…But by the appointment of God, the law was rendered all the stronger in its virtue by those who in their impiety endeavored to impair it more fully. Who among so many thousands desiring to rule wishes to be like Gideon? Or who wishes the law to be dominant over himself and the people?…For if he took care to order those things which the law declared, the people would acquiesce in obeying him so that there would not be iniquity and dispute in the community; and the governor ought certainly to satisfy the people over whom he governs.”[1]

–          “Liberty, therefore, judges in accordance with the free will of the individual, and it is not afraid to censure that which seems to oppose sound moral character. Indeed, nothing except virtue is more glorious than liberty, if however liberty is ever properly separated from virtue. For it is evident to everyone of sound wisdom that true liberty does not arise elsewhere. For this reason, because virtue is agreed to be the greatest good in life and that which alone banishes the heavy and hateful yoke of servility, philosophers strongly advise that, if assailed by necessity, one is to die for virtue, which is the sole reason for living. Yet this does not arise in its perfection without liberty, and the loss of liberty demonstrates irrefutably that virtue is not present. And, therefore, anyone is free according to the virtue of their dispositions (habits) and to the extent that one is free the virtues are effective…. And so what is more attractive than liberty? What is more favorable to him who has some reverence for the virtues? We read that it has spurred on all outstanding princes; and none has ever trampled on liberty except for the manifest enemies of virtue….And so the practice of liberty is excellent…Therefore, man is to be free and it is always permitted to a free man to speak to persons about restraining their vices. Thus, there is even a legal right according to which it is permitted to express the truth in speech, and this December liberty indulges even slaves in opposition to their lords so long as they speak the truth.”[2]

John of Salisbury (1120 – 1180) was one of the outstanding thinkers and statesmen of the High Middle Ages. His contributions to the written legacy of that period are broad and significant. His work as a prominent clergyman in the key diplomacy and politics of his day included such transformative events as the Crusades and the conflict between English King Henry II and Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterbury. Moreover, while his arguments and prescriptions are certainly more relevant to modern circumstances than most would expect, the humble Christian spirit of a man who named himself “John the Little” calls additional importance to John of Salisbury as worthy of study.

John was born at Old Sarum, a medieval settlement above what is now the town of Salisbury, England.[3] While little is known of his youth, John springs onto the historical scene in 1136 when he began studies in Paris, the intellectual center of Christian Europe in that period. As a result, John was able to associate with and learn from the preeminent thinkers of his time, including William of Conches, Peter Abelard, and Gilbert of Poitiers. While he could have pursued an academic or philosophical career, John returned to England as a clergyman, serving under Archbishop Theobald of Canterbury.[4]

As a skilled and intelligent young man, John was required to communicate with and counsel leading figures of his day, including Nicholas Breakspear, later Pope Adrian IV, the young English King Henry II, and aspiring church leader Thomas Becket. While John was a dutiful and effective international diplomat, he freely criticized the corruption and luxury that characterized the Papal Court in his day. Further, while he supported the cause of Henry II in overthrowing the usurper King Stephen in England, he opposed the former’s attacks on the English church, to the point of banishment from Henry’s kingdom in 1156.[5]

As John did not raise his resistance and criticism to the point of martyrdom, avoiding the fate of his close friend Thomas Becket, made Archbishop of Canterbury in 1162, John continued serving in various ecclesiastical roles throughout his later years. He was an attendant of the papal court while in exile, but was eventually appointed in 1176 the Bishop of Chartres, a large urban center in northern France, a position he held until his death in 1180. There he lies buried, an accomplished Englishman estranged by the conflicts of his day from the country of his birth.[6]

Beyond his statesmanship, John left a significant written legacy that clearly reveals the depth and strength of his mind. The Policraticus, John’s major work, is an original integration of Christian theology and Classical philosophy, emphasizing the importance of truth, moderation, law, and liberty in politics. Drawing on an incredible depth of ancient, Scholastic, and Biblical sources, John elaborates a view of society and authority that is still earnestly relevant today and should be more familiar to Christians interested in public engagement. Beyond theory, John also wrote the Historia Pontificalis, a historical work touching on the key events of the 1150’s. This venture into history led John to compose biographies of great English churchmen Anselm and Thomas a Becket. Further, along more academic lines, John wrote the Metalogicon, a consideration of educational and pedagogical practice. Finally, he even authored a lengthy satirical poem called the Entheticus Major.[7]

These prolific works, across such a range of subject areas, truly reveal John of Salisbury as a fully-fledged scholar. The spirit of honest inquiry and generous critique that runs through them is profitable to anyone interested in the particular disciplines and the broader audience of engaged believers to whom John was writing in his own day. While it may seem uninteresting or difficult to engage with a sage from so many years ago, John of Salisbury’s deep rooting in Christian truth allows him to speak to people of faith in all times, and his wisdom goes beyond the practical. Carving out a few moments to become familiar with John of Salisbury will be deeply rewarding.

–          “It pertains to the sacred calling of the governor to take precautions lest the more powerful men assail the more humble and lest the defenders of the innocent persecute their wards with false accusations of crimes. He will also prohibit the introduction of exactions and acts of violence and sales extorted out of fear and pledges of security without price or payment. He will not burden his province with publicly subsidized hospitality, and finally he will be on guard lest anyone profit from iniquity or suffer damage. For the good and dignified governor agrees to take care that his province is peaceful and quiet; this will easily be preserved if, moved by solicitude, he searches the province for bad men and removes them….Surely everyone who pronounces judgment is to observe the principle that ready consultation with him is permitted, but he is not to suffer any humiliation. For that reason, the command is added that no governor may admit provincials into and further intimacy; for contempt for dignity is born out of equality of social intercourse. And, in summary, he should pronounce judgment so that his authority is augmented by the dignity of his temperament.”[8]

–          “Indeed I am at a loss to explain why many of [Pope] Eugenius’ judgments were so easily revoked, unless for these two reasons: first that he had merited it by so readily revoking the sentences of his predecessors, not to mention his fellow-bishops, and secondly that he was too ready to rely on his personal opinion in imposing sentences. For he was of such a suspicious nature that he would rarely believe anyone, unless he were convinced by his own personal experience or the highest authority. I think there were two reasons for this suspicion: both weakness of character and consciousness of the failings of his ‘flanks,’ as he used to call his assessors and counsellors.”[9]

Pondering a question on politics, culture, the Christian life, or really any topic? Submit it to mailbag.bereans@gmail.com! Your question may feature in Matt’s Marvelous Monday Mailbag.

[1] John of Salisbury, Policraticus: Of the Frivolities of Courtiers and the Footprints of Philosophers, ed. and trans. by Cary J. Nederman, (UK: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 215-216.

[2] Ibid, 175-176, 180.

[3] Ibid, xvi-xvii.

[4] Ibid, xvi-xvii.

[5] Ibid, xvi-xvii.

[6] Ibid, xvi-xvii.

[7] Ibid, xvii-xviii.

[8] Ibid, 95-96.

[9] John of Salisbury, Memoirs of the Papal Court, trans. by Marjorie Chibnall, (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd., 1956), 51.