A Very Pleasaunt & Fruitful Diologe Called the Epicure

In Short

This work is a philosophical dialogue that seeks to reclaim the term "Epicure" for the Christian life. Through a conversation between two speakers, Hedonius and Spudeus, it argues that the pursuit of pleasure—properly understood—is the natural goal of every person. By distinguishing between the transient, harmful sensations of the body and the enduring, profound joys of the spirit, the text posits that the truly pious individual is the ultimate seeker of pleasure, finding peace through virtue, repentance, and a steadfast devotion to the Gospel.

The Story

The dialogue opens with a focus on the education of a young prince, emphasizing that true nobility is found in wisdom and virtue rather than in riches or worldly status. The author establishes that the most faithful subject and the most successful leader is the one who diligently studies the word of God. From this preamble, the conversation shifts to the core debate between two figures: Hedonius, the proponent of a new, godly hedonism, and Spudeus, the skeptical seeker of truth.

The central conflict arises from the common, derogatory understanding of the "Epicure" as someone who lives like a beast, chasing base desires. Hedonius challenges this, asserting that those who live according to Christ are, in fact, the most "right" Epicures. He argues that while the world mistakenly equates pleasure with excess, the reality is that the most intense and sustained pleasure comes from a quiet mind, free from fear and remorse.

As the dialogue progresses, Hedonius dissects the nature of human desire. He argues that common vices like ambition, gluttony, and lust are inherently bitter because they are followed by misery, sickness, and the agonizing "grudge of conscience." He uses the metaphor of the stone of Tantalus—hanging precariously over one's head—to describe the state of a person living in sin. Even at a banquet, such an individual cannot enjoy the food because they are haunted by the dread of judgment and the loss of divine favor.

Spudeus initially resists, pointing out that the virtuous often suffer hunger, poverty, and physical discomfort. Hedonius counters that these external hardships are negligible compared to the inward destruction caused by sin. He posits that a virtuous person, even in poverty, lives "more deliciously" than a wealthy king who lacks inner peace. When a person aligns their will with God’s, even unavoidable suffering becomes a source of gratitude and spiritual growth.

The dialogue concludes by reconciling the physical and the spiritual. Hedonius suggests that the "pleasures" of the body, such as marriage or shared meals, are only truly enjoyable when they are sanctified by godly love and temperate living. He transforms the debate into a call for total commitment to the Gospel. The final resolution is an invitation to grace: even for the most wayward soul, repentance is the key. By turning to God with a contrite heart, one can finally cast off the heavy stone of guilt and experience the true, lasting pleasure of divine reconciliation.

How It Unfolds

The framing of virtue The text begins by addressing a young prince, establishing that the most valuable treasures are erudition and piety. It positions the reading of the Gospel as the necessary foundation for a stable and prosperous life.

Defining the Epicure Hedonius introduces the controversial idea that Christians are the true Epicures, provided they seek the right kind of pleasure. He and Spudeus debate the ancient philosophers and agree that the pursuit of the "highest good" is the common goal of humanity.

The anatomy of false pleasure The conversation turns to the traps of excess, comparing sinful desires to poison masked by honey. Hedonius details how physical indulgence leads to inevitable regret and the "grudge of conscience."

The internal sanctuary Hedonius argues that the mind is the true source of all joy or misery. He demonstrates that a simple life, when directed by the spirit, provides a more profound sense of satisfaction than any worldly extravagance.

The final liberation The dialogue ends with the promise that no one is beyond the reach of divine mercy. By accepting the Gospel, the believer finds the ultimate freedom from the terrors of judgment and the burdens of a guilty conscience.

The People

Hedonius acts as the primary teacher and the voice of the new philosophy. He is calm, articulate, and deeply convinced that true joy and virtue are inseparable. He serves as a guide, constantly redirecting the conversation from external appearances to internal states of grace.

Spudeus represents the conventional, skeptical reader. He is intelligent but initially trapped by the popular, negative definitions of "pleasure" and "virtue." Throughout the dialogue, he serves as a necessary foil, raising common-sense objections about physical suffering and the perceived joylessness of the pious. His role is to be gradually persuaded, moving from confusion to a clearer understanding of the author’s argument.

The relationship between them is one of mutual, intellectual respect. Hedonius does not lecture from a position of detached authority; he treats Spudeus as an equal partner in a search for clarity. By the end, Spudeus is not merely a pupil who has been defeated in debate, but someone who has been opened to a more profound way of experiencing the world.

In Its Own Voice

"For that God him self hath wrought, and fourmed your mynde so apt and desirous too attayne and diligêtly too seeke for al godly doctrine, that euê now you doo shewe in all youre saiynges and dooinges suche a wonderfull pleasaûtes much lyke vnto a certayne swete musike or harmonie."

The author offers this praise to the young Prince Edward, framing his dedication to learning as a form of divine music.

"If nothing bee more miserable thê an vnquiet mynde, it foloweth also, that there is nothing happiar, then a mynde voyde of all feare, grudge, and vnquietnes."

Hedonius provides the central axiom of his argument, asserting that happiness is fundamentally a state of internal peace rather than a collection of external possessions.

What It's Really About

The central question of the book is: what is the true nature of human satisfaction? The author argues that human beings are hard-wired to pursue pleasure, but that we are catastrophically wrong about where to find it. The text suggests that the "Epicurean" impulse—to avoid pain and seek enjoyment—is not inherently sinful, but rather a God-given instinct that has been corrupted. By moving the site of pleasure from the body to the soul, the book attempts to reconcile human nature with divine command. It explores the tension between worldly reality and spiritual aspiration, concluding that the only way to live a "pleasantly" consistent life is to harmonize one’s inner state with the teachings of the Gospel.

Why Read It Today

Readers who enjoy the Socratic tradition of philosophical dialogue will find this a fascinating exercise in rhetorical repurposing. The book feels intimate, like a late-night conversation between two friends attempting to reconcile their intellectual curiosity with their moral obligations. It captures a specific moment of Reformation-era transition, where ancient pagan philosophy is being actively reclaimed and baptized into Christian service.

However, the modern reader should be prepared for the dense, period-specific language and the intense theological focus. The prose, written in a 16th-century English style, requires a patient eye to navigate its unique spelling and syntax. Furthermore, the text reflects the binary, sometimes harsh moralizing of its time—particularly in its condemnation of "papistical" practices and its views on social order. It does not offer a modern, secular psychological comfort; rather, it demands that the reader consider the "grudge of conscience" as a real and pressing burden.

Ultimately, the book rewards those interested in the history of ideas. It leaves the reader with a striking, counter-intuitive image: that of the saint as the most joyful person in the room, and the sinner as one who is perpetually dining with a metaphorical stone hanging over their head. It is a document of profound intellectual optimism.