I am baffled by a question that no one has answered. Why is there such a focus on what Thomas More did as Lord Chancellor and such a defense?
The defense is unnecessary. The man was a martyr. At that point, he exercises the greatest act of love. Like Christ, he lays down his life to fulfill the will of God. Is there any sin that can trump that degree of love?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Well, okay, I’ll answer, and I hopefully I won’t get in trouble by the mods for doing so. So here goes: Yes, IMOHO there are sins that can trump ‘that degree of love’. Hurting other people, like burning non-Catholics , or those who don’t want to be Catholic, at the stake, trumps laying down one’s life for one’s convictions, because you have still hurt other people. Not only that, you have disobeyed Jesus directive to, “shake the dust of that house off your feet”. So IMOHO, someone of authority who tortured or put someone to death beause they didn’t accept the word of the Catholic Church was disobeying Jesus in his/her own right.
In addition, IMOHO, if someone has had other lives put to death for those convictions, he/she wouldn’t think any better of his/her own life for those same convictions. So it would only be expected that his/her degree of stubbornness and lack of understanding for another person’s choices would be such that he/she’d be willing to lay his/her life on the line once s/he has taken other people’s lives. It’s only right: if you don’t care about another person’s life, why would you care about your own?
But I see where you’re coming from and I understand what you’re saying, but I’m just saying that for some people being martyred doesn’t make up for the wrongs done in life. Some might say that Thomas More made up for all his past transgressions by dying for his faith, and nothing else matters. But others might say it’s important to look at the whole picture. Others might even say that Thomas More was merely being stubborn in his resolve, and was trying to prove a point when martyred and couldn’t have possibly had remorse for the bad he was doing because he felt that his victims deserved what they got. The only fact in the matter is that no one can see into the head of Thomas More to know what exactly he was thinking at the time of his death except for God. And really, no one else matters but God, and what He thinks.
Personally, IMOHO, I wouldn’t think any highly of a person who terrorized non-Christians just because they died for their faith in the end. On the contrary, I think he should have died for his faith, since he took other people’s lives for not believing in his faith. Many people have died for their convictions: Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, etc… That doesn’t make Thomas More any more or less special than anyone else. He still had people (even a handful) put to death because they refused to believe in the Catholic Church. Of course he didn’t light the fire himself, but he was directly responsible. And is that a reason to die? Not to me. Not when direct instructions from the mouth of Jesus said, “shake the dust of that house off your feet”. Had Jesus instead said, “torture and burn them if they don’t believe”, maybe I’d concede, but he didn’t. But that’s just me.
And again, as I said in a previous post, nothing good came of these deaths. Killing non-believers just gave other people reason to hate the Catholic Church and turn to other religions. It made them hide and it made devout Catholics hide them. It forced people to lie so that they could make their choices. It made the Church look bad to those outside the Church as well as those who who are a part of the Church. That can’t be good. That can only be evil. Again just MOHO…
Life is all about compromise and you have to pick your battles. You’re not going to agree with every little thing the Church says and does, but you have to try and follow the rules the best you can. It’s part of being Catholic…