Cromwell vs Thomas More

The Tudors

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Tudors
• Thomas
• More
• Jeremy
• Northam
• Cromwell
• James
• Frain

[Tillyvalle]

Thomas More questioned heretics, he did not burn them.

[jswranch]

Good comment. However, do you have any evidence that Moore ever supported the burning of unrepentant heretics/political revolutionaries? If so, I would like to see it.

[dizzy365]

"There really is no difference between us except that I shall die today...and you tomorrow." DAYM! I bet he saw Cromwell's fall coming!

[100percentbabeLOL]

The Church of England (Henry VII Church) declared Thomas Moore a saint, I could be wrong but if Thomas Moore was involved in Burning of heretics as suggested they wouldn't have done.

[Tillyvalle]

@Makashi11 As I said before Thomas More had no authority to order executions. He questioned heretics and if he could not get them to recant he handed them over to the religious authorities. Yes he approved of the burning of heretics and I am aware that this side of him is not depicted in AMFAS. However the film does depict his attempts to stay true to his beliefs in the face of increased hostility from a king who once shared those beliefs but whose desire for an heir became more important .

[Makashi11]

@Tillyvalle I am afraid to say that he did. He authorised the burning of many people simply for reading the Bible in English. This depiction of him, like that in Robert Bolt's 'A Man for All Seasons' is romanticised.

[bairns123]

@hazydavey I'm sorry but I'm not really sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me!

[hazydavey]

@Tillyvalle

Indeed, but to suggest that More wasn't responsible for the burning of heretics would be like a hand-washing worthy of Pontius Pilate. About the best that can be said is that More took no joy in such burnings (or other tortures he approved of) and that they were relatively infrequent in England. These were different times, when even a saintly "humanist" could justify the burning of heretics. What was one man's flesh compared to the countless eternal souls threatened by heresy?

[Tillyvalle]

@melikab Also been doing some digging. Thomas More was "personally involved" in prosecuting only three out of the six cases of heresy in all of England that led to burning during the three years of his chancellorship. When he declared that those convicted of heresy were "well and worthily burned" he was showing a judge's grim approval of the well-deserved punishment of a criminal who has committed what More called the worst of crimes - leading other souls to eternal perdition.

[OscarsanchezIII]

@Tillyvalle First of all, I'm admiror and devout of St. Thomas More. But historical data says, according to a couple sources I've read, that he orderer the burning of around 6 (six) people, of course he was deeply troubled about that; but you have to remember that you cannot judge the facts of the past under the values and principles of the present, it's not that simle...

[melikab]

@Tillyvalle part III) lastly i want to bring up James Bainham`s public speech prior to his burning where he explicitly states that the judge and accuser in his case was none other than Sir Thomas More. and then he goes on to renounce a lot of things.

[melikab]

@Tillyvalle part II) More, as a judge of a lower court in his earlier years, was a proponent of secular punishment of heresy by burning since he saw heresy as a national threat, not simply a religious one and also because as in the case of Bilney, he had noticed the leniency of ecclesiastical courts in dealing with their clergy peers. so he did oversee the burnings and in his position had the highest authority after the king himself in judging these matters as well as sitting parliament for him