Everything seems to be a contradiction to you. Why should this be any different and why should you even care for that matter?I just finished watching the movie about St. Thomas More called “A Man for All Seasons”. He opposed King Henry the VIII’s attempt to be the head of the Church in England. In other words, he opposed the formation of the Anglican Church. Henry the VIII had him beheaded. So why does the Church of England “honor” him and have him in their calendar of saints, etc? Seems to be a contradiction to me.
Yeah but the Act of Succession said that Henry VIII was the head of the church of england, and More objected to that. That’s ultimately what got him killed. He was a servant of the king, but of God first. That’s what he always said. Thomas More and many others went against the idea of the King of England being the supreme head of the church in england, and they lost their lives because of it.More was executed for refusing to swear to the Oath of Succession, treasonable under the 1534 Act of Succession. I don’t know of any Anglicans who have him in the Kalendar, but the idea wouldn’t bother me. Though MAN FOR ALL SEASONS is a good movie, it is not good history. More, though was a good man.
GKC
No, that was the Supreme Head Act, also of 1534, that said that. More was executed for refusing to swear the Oath of Allegiance required by the Act of Succession. Trust me.While there is no doubt More, and Fisher, didn’t accept the Supreme Head Act, it was the Oath of Succession that sent them to the block. Refusal to swear the Oath was legally misprision of high treason and a capital crime.Yeah but the Act of Succession said that Henry VIII was the head of the church of england, and More objected to that. That’s ultimately what got him killed. He was a servant of the king, but of God first. That’s what he always said. Thomas More and many others went against the idea of the King of England being the supreme head of the church in england, and they lost their lives because of it.
Yeh well he also disagreed with the Head Act.No, that was the Supreme Head Act, also of 1534, that said that. More was executed for refusing to swear the Oath of Allegiance required by the Act of Succession. Trust me.While there is no doubt More, and Fisher, didn’t accept the Supreme Head Act, it was the Oath of Succession that sent them to the block. Refusal to swear the Oath was legally misprision of high treason and a capital crime.
GKC
Which didn’t get him executed. The Oath did.Yeh well he also disagreed with the Head Act.
Seems like an honest question to me. St. Thomas More opposed the formation of the Anglican church and Anglicans honor him. Fair question.Everything seems to be a contradiction to you. Why should this be any different and why should you even care for that matter?
Thomas Cranmer played a far more important role in anglicanism than Henry or More. One must also remember that Cranmer was murdered by the reigning monarch (‘Bloody’ Mary) for his religion. Both sides had blood on their hands.It’s curious that Thomas More appears on many Anglican Calendars, but I don’t know of one that has either Thomas Cranmer or Henry VIII.
Think about it.
I just finished watching the movie about St. Thomas More called “A Man for All Seasons”. He opposed King Henry the VIII’s attempt to be the head of the Church in England. In other words, he opposed the formation of the Anglican Church. Henry the VIII had him beheaded. So why does the Church of England “honor” him and have him in their calendar of saints, etc? Seems to be a contradiction to me.
Hi, I used to be Anglican (but in South Africa) before my eyes were opened, or is it before my ears were opened?Have you tried asking some Anglicans?
Thank you, raphinal this is what I was trying to say, its late and I’m full of cold, so the brain is certainly not working properly.Set aside all of the history and politics
If this man is not honored by Anglicans, they are missing out on a great example of the duty of a Christian. Our first priority is to God, and we must conform our wills to his.
If he is honored by Anglicans, there is hope for the Anglican CHurch.
I never said the Anglican Church canonized him. Only the Catholic Church can legitimately canonize someone. I just said they “honor” him. They have a day for him. He was opposed to the act which helped create Anglican Church, so why do Anglicans give him any honor at all? If there was a man who opposed Jesus and his desire to found a church, then I doubt the Catholic Church would honor him.Hello an Anglican and member of The Church of England here.
His day was 6th July but I don’t know if it still is.
Sir Thomas Moore removed himself from court and refused the bill of succesion. What he didn’t like about the bill of succesion was that it declared Henry’'s marriage to Kathrine of Aragon invalid and princess Mary a bastard. Sir Thomas Moore believed the marriage to be valid.
Sir Thomas Moore was a good man to the point where he was the only person in England to enter the legal profesion and leave it with less money than hhe went into with. He was the only honest lawyer in England.
He stuck to his religous conviction that Henry’s marraige was valid and was martyred for his faith.
Hope this helps.
Also the Anglican Church has cannonized nobody.
I’ve not aseen a Kalendar with More on it. Though, as I said, it is possible, and wouldn’t be a problem, if so.It’s curious that Thomas More appears on many Anglican Calendars, but I don’t know of one that has either Thomas Cranmer or Henry VIII.
Think about it.