Sir Thomas More

  • Thread starter Thread starter JohnDennis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JohnDennis

Guest
Sorry if in the wrong forum. Just finished watching THE TUDORS episodes re. STM and his execution. My question is though true to the Catholic faith with his bloody death, what about those he executed in a horrible way because of heresy. I realize the Church sees thing differently now but surely this was in New Testament times and I have a hard time thinking this would be Gods will. This is tough one for me. Any opions?

Johndw
 
Last edited:
[I don’t believe St Thomas More executed anyone for heresy.] <— (I was mistaken) I’m halfway through my second read of James Monti’s book The King’s Good Servant, but God’s First, and I feel like I’ve gotten closer to this great saint. I’ve added him as one of the saints I pray with on my rosary, right next to (soon to be Blessed) Fulton Sheen.
 
Last edited:
Yes, St Thomas More had people executed for heresy, but only if there was no alternative. He was a lenient as he could be, although if he was too lenient he could end up sharing the fate of the accused.
At the time heresy and treason were the same. There was a real concern that heresies could ruin the secular powers as well, as they derived authority from the church.
In modern context it seems a shocking decision but for the time it was seen as a kindness. By killing a few people brutally and publicly it was hoped that the heresy would be stamped out, saving others from eternal damnation, and the kingdom from social chaos or even civil war.

During the Reformation Catholics like St. More and Queen Mary Tudor were vilified by reformers to justify their own positions. It was political manoeuvring, which sadly took place on both sides.
 
I don’t think we should lump Thomas More in with “Bloody Mary”. More tried hard not to execute people. He is also venerated not only in the Catholic Church but the Church of England, who likely realize that More was trying to do his best between a rock and a hard place. Media programs on More like to portray him as a villain. He wasn’t.
 
Out of curiosity, why would executing heretics be outside of God’s will? I have my own opinions, but I’d like it if you would expand a bit.
 
Something I cannot prove but a purely speculative opinion. It just seems at odds with New Testament theology. What was once thought to be a last resort measure to protect the Church is now considered a heinous crime. I know different times but I still cant imagine Christ asking for someones death. By the way I am a faithful Catholic (hopefully) who be considered traditional.

Johndw52
 
JohnDennis said:
Sorry if in the wrong forum. Just finished watching THE TUDORS episodes re. STM and his execution. My question is though true to the Catholic faith with his bloody death, what about those he executed in a horrible way because of heresy. I realize the Church sees thing differently now but surely this was in New Testament times and I have a hard time thinking this would be Gods will. This is tough one for me. Any opions?

Johndw
Click to expand...
How about Saint Paul who spent years persecuting and killing Christians?
 
I’m not sure whether your question is
  1. “How could it be God’s will to kill heretics generally?” To which the answer is, God would probably prefer that we not kill anybody, but killing in self-defense is generally understood to be necessary at times, for example if terrorists were invading your town and threatening your family. Heretics in those days were considered to be similar to terrorists as they would not only influence people into sin and cause them to go to Hell, but also they would upset the social order (as someone already said) and likely make it difficult or impossible for the Catholic Church to continue its operation. Which, as shown by the Reformation, is exactly what ended up happening; Catholicism was soon heavily restricted or even forbidden in areas where the Protestants took over. In those days, religion was heavily entwined with government, and the idea of a society where people were free to just follow whatever religion they pleased, or no religion, was still in the future.
Or
  1. “How could Thomas More be a saint if he killed heretics?” Thomas More died a martyr. He also sacrificed much because he had a good life and could have continued to have it if he’d just gone along with the King, who didn’t want to kill him. His martyrdom is the primary reason why he’s a saint. We have sainted martyrs who were Crusaders and basically in the business of killing off heretics in order to remove the threat to Christians. And we have other sainted martyrs who were military saints and simply in the business of being career military, which in at least some cases meant you went where your superior ordered you to go and killed who they told you to kill. Saints aren’t perfect, but being a martyr compensates for a lot of imperfect behavior on earth.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
I’m not sure whether your question is
  1. … Heretics in those days were considered to be similar to terrorists as they would not only influence people into sin and cause them to go to Hell, but also they would upset the social order (as someone already said) and likely make it difficult or impossible for the Catholic Church to continue its operation. Which, as shown by the Reformation, is exactly what ended up happening; Catholicism was soon heavily restricted or even forbidden in areas where the Protestants took over. In those days, religion was heavily entwined with government, and the idea of a society where people were free to just follow whatever religion they pleased, or no religion, was still in the future.
Click to expand...
So in a Muslim country where religion is heavily entwined with government and those who think differently could upset the social order, is it right for them to kill Christians?
 
Is that what I said?

Please note I said “In Those Days” and that God would prefer we not kill anyone.

If Muslims or anyone else invades my town and wants to kill me, my neighbors and my loved ones, it would be reasonable and normal to take up arms. But nowadays we don’t go looking for groups to kill off who aren’t directly and seriously threatening our lives.

Regarding “In Those Days”, many centuries early as shown in the OT, the way for a people to get ahead economically was to kill off everybody living in an area and take their land. We don’t do that any more either.
 
Last edited:
I’m using the criteria that you specifically gave which excused the killing of heretics:
  1. Religion was entwined with government
  2. Heretics were equated with terrorists who could influence people to sin and cause them to go to Hell.
  3. Heretics would upset the social order.
  4. It’s not about people invading another town (which I didn’t mention) but areas where the heretics differed from the long-allowed religion in the area.
To say that God would “prefer” not to kill anyone for being heretics (combined with the other points you made) shows that God is ok with killing heretics if they don’t rescind their heretical ways. We wouldn’t accept that if the Catholic was on the other end of the power structure, and we shouldn’t accept it when the Catholics were in charge.
 
I didn’t intend to “excuse” anything. I am stating the facts of why people back then thought it was okay. It’s up to God to judge it in view of the circumstances for each person who participated in killing. I am not a history major and I did not live back then so I’m not in a position to be “excusing” people or condemning them.

I suppose if I made a post on why US settlers killed Native Americans in the 1800s you’d say I was “excusing” that too.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
I didn’t intend to “excuse” anything. I am stating the facts of why people back then thought it was okay. It’s up to God to judge it in view of the circumstances for each person who participated in killing. I am not a history major and I did not live back then so I’m not in a position to be “excusing” people or condemning them.

I suppose if I made a post on why US settlers killed Native Americans in the 1800s you’d say I was “excusing” that too.
Click to expand...
My apologies for saying that you were accepting of the heinous acts of Thomas More and others that were involved in the burning of heretics.
 
Last edited:
AlmaRedemptorisMater said:
Out of curiosity, why would executing heretics be outside of God’s will?
Click to expand...
As evidenced in the thread it seems that some people are under the impression that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God are a different being or that an evolution occurred.
 
That was pre-conversion, when Paul was persecuting the early church and the apostles never preached death to non believers, heretics or not.

Johndw
 
Thank you. It does hearten me that Catholics and Anglicans can agree on Thomas More.

I learned recently that in the late 1500s, several Anglican playwrights wrote a sympathetic play about the life of Thomas More which was later revised by Shakespeare. Reportedly it centered around questions of obedience to the state, particularly More’s role in ending some riots against foreign immigrants, and it left out Henry VIII’s conflict with the Pope entirely. More must have been an interesting character if he was regarded favorably by non-Catholics that close to his death.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
a sympathetic play about the life of Thomas More which was later revised by Shakespeare
Click to expand...
Yes, revised by many hands including those of Shakespeare. It has been produced on occasion, and Ian McKellen no less is associated with the title rôle.
 
We do recognize that More and Fisher were great and Godly men, and were at the same time, men of their times. As is everybody.

I wouldn’t necessarily cut the Anglicans of the day too much slack, though. The primary author, Anthony Munday, was a great champion of religious freedom (I’ve read somewhere) and could see More somewhat in this light. More, as John Guy, in his excellent bio of More points out, didn’t die for liberty or conscience. He died for the Faith.

The above mentioned bio (Guy/THOMAS MORE) is highly recommended in general, esp. on the subject here, chaps. 6 and 10, particularly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top