Theme Of Morality In The Canterbury Tales

According to Immanuel Kant, “Morality is not the doctrine of how we may make ourselves happy, but how we may make ourselves worthy of happiness,” which perfectly describes the overall theme of The Canterbury Tales. Morality is a prominent issue throughout the entirety of the poem. The Canterbury Tales is a collection of twenty-four complete stories written by Geoffrey Chaucer. In the poem, each of the pilgrims struggles with their sense of morality. Although most of the pilgrims in the poem are notorious for their unscrupulous behavior, there are those few virtuous ones. The morality between the pilgrims contrasts immensely and allows for an easily seen division between the amoral and the honorable pilgrims. Among these pilgrims are two by

the name of the Parson and the Friar. The Parson is considered to be morally good while the Friar is considered to be morally corrupt when compared in class and conduct.
Although the Parson and the Friar are both seemingly religious characters at first glance, they are exceedingly different when it comes to class. The Parson is a “holy-minded man of good renown,” which means he is both religious and well-respected in his community (487). Not only is the Parson a reputable man, but “he is rich in holy thought and work.” (489). The narrator states that the Parson is poor which proves the Parson is considered to be lower-class but is an upstanding man. The Parson also refers to his parishioners and other members of the church as “his sheep,” in which he feels a responsibility to lead since they are so full of sin (506). This shows that the Parson views himself as a sort of caretaker of Christian souls, which is a responsibility he does not take lightly. In contrast, the Friar is “highly beloved.../ With Country folk within his boundary,” but unlike the Parson, the Friar is a beggar for the church (487). In lines 261- 263, the Friar “got his farthing from [a poor widow] just the same before he left, and so his income came to more than he laid out,” which is saying that the Friar takes money from the poor to acquire more money for his own income. He is supposed to be begging for the church, and from this statement, one can assume he is not giving it all to the church but keeping it for himself. Therefore, the Friar most likely has a reasonable amount of money due to the immoral ways he obtains it. Although the Parson may be poor, he has a substantial amount of integrity. The Friar may have money, but displays his selfish and negative demeanor countless times throughout the poem which reveals his true character. This confirms that the Parson is morally good, and the Friar is morally corrupt.
The Parson in comparison to the Friar varies drastically when it comes to conduct.

The Parson is an extremely humble, generous, and overall astounding person. He is not greedy in the slightest and gives to the poor as much as possible. Also, his conduct is impeccable and he is a role model for all parishioners. This description of the Parson is the complete opposite of the Friar’s true disposition and moral character. The Friar believes “Nothing good can come of commerce with such slum-and-gutter dwellers,/But only with the rich and victual-sellers” (250). The Friar only worked with the upper-class and believed “it was not fitting with the dignity of his position/[to deal] with a scum of wretched leper.” (248). One can assume from this statement that he must not be a man of God if he is so degrading of others. The Friar continually displays a particularly greedy and judgmental persona throughout the poem. As mentioned before, the Friar taking money from the poor also says a lot about his character. If he was sincerely a man of the church, he would not take from people who already live in poverty. He certainly does not follow God’s devout way of life. While the Parson gives to the poor, the Friar takes from them. Though the Friar’s behavior is looked down upon in the eyes of the church, the Parson “truly knew Christ’s gospel and would preach it/Devoutly to parishioners, and teach it,” which verifies that he truly is a religious and righteous man (491). This validates the theory that the Parson has a fine grasp on his morality while the Friar does not due to his dishonorable

behavior.
In conclusion, the Parson has a great sense of morality while the Friar does not when compared in class and conduct. In The Canterbury Tales, the Parson continuously demonstrates his good-natured spirit, yet the Friar has to be given deeper thought due to his scandalous actions. It must be remembered that “morality is… the doctrine of how we may make ourselves… worthy of happiness.” Most of the pilgrims are essentially immoral and only think of how to make themselves happy. They do not have a grasp on their morality and are blinded by sin and greed. When looking at both characters from the outside, they may both look like altruistic, religious characters, but in reality, they are exceptionally different.