Posted on 06/21/2011 4:23:40 PM PDT by Salvation
St. Thomas More, Martyr Of The English Reformation, Remembered June 22DENVER, COLO., June 19 (CNA/EWTN News) - On June 22, the Catholic Church will honor the life and martyrdom of St. Thomas More, the lawyer, author and statesman who lost his life opposing King Henry VIII's plan to subordinate the Church to the English monarchy. |
We are direct descendents of St Thomas More.
See, More is really an incredible man: he executes his enemies in other countries, even after he's dead.
He helped to creat the environment in which Tyndale was hunted down.
Also, A Man for All Seasons was an incredible movie.
“Protestant rulers of the time behaved precisely the same way toward those who disagreed with them on religious grounds, whether Protestant or Catholic.”
False. Check out the difference between the reign of Mary & Elizabeth. Both prosecuted, but Elizabeth did it largely at the end of her reign after multiple assassination attempts.
And More greatly increased the pressure on ‘heretics’, well above what had been done in previous years.
“Tyndale’s translation contained plenty of notes and editorial changes supporting his Protestant point of view.”
False. I’ve got a copy of his 1526 New Testament, and there is not a note in it. His translation was accurate, which made it an object of More’s hate.
“Tyndale lived on the continent from 1524 until his death”
Yes. He would have died earlier if he had returned to England. More would have seen to that!
“See, More is really an incredible man: he executes his enemies in other countries, even after he’s dead.”
He did not light the fire himself, but that isn’t what I’m accusing him of doing. He hated Protestants, killed those he could catch who did not repent, and tried to kill Tyndale. That his efforts did not bear fruit until after his own fall doesn’t mean his efforts were not made.
My point is that “A Man for All Seasons” is a phoney. His hatred for Protestants and for William Tyndale in particular, and his desire to ban vernacular translations into English, make him a very different man that portrayed on the stage. And he is NOT a man I would celebrate, since he would have killed me if I lived when he did.
A man who wants to limit the spread of God’s Word is NOT a man we should praise!
Not really that impressive. He was arrested a year before he was executed. It was More's efforts that got him arrested and charged with heresy.
“He [Tyndall] was arrested a year before he was executed. It was More’s efforts that got him arrested and charged with heresy.”
Isn’t that a bit like blaming a District Attorney for state executions? “Heresy,” at the time, was as much a civil crime as it was a religious offense. As even Elizabeth manifested when she beheaded Edmund Campion.
You wrote:
“It was More’s efforts that got him arrested and charged with heresy.”
More was a secular official and only had authority in secular affairs in England. Tyndale was arrested on the continent, not England. He was given an ecclesiastical trial, not a secular one.
“More was a secular official and only had authority in secular affairs in England.”
Odd. He approved the deaths of ‘heretics’ in England, and supported the efforts to find and stop Tyndale. He was NOT just concerned with traffic laws!
More was out of power by the time of Tyndale’s betrayal and trial. However, while he could, he supported the efforts to find and kill William Tyndale. That the efforts bore fruit after More’s fall was not More’s fault.
More hated Tyndale, and did his best to stop the Tyndale’s translation since it was designed to be read by commoners. This is not open to doubt, since More wrote extensively about it.
I need to point out that the picture I posted was from the 1526 edition. I’ve read the 1534 edition DID have notes added, although a pirated edition of it did not. Of course, More opposed both editions.
First of all, lest we forget:
Tyndale’s 1536 edition:
http://www.kjv-only.com/oldscans/tyndale.jpg
Second:
The New Testament, translated by William Tyndale. [Printed at Cologne in the Office of Peter Quentell, 1526.] 4to. in black letter with wood cuts, ***marginal notes and references***. Of this edition an account will be found in CochUei Vita et Acta Mart. Lutheri. Lewis doubts Cochlsus’s story, but the truth of it has been fully proved by the recent discovery of a fragment of the book, now in the possession of Mr. Thomas Rodd, of Great Newport-street. The inhibition of Bp. pages; 1 Willyam Tin dale yet once more to the Christen reader’, 9 pages; a second title-page ‘The newe Testament. Imprinted at Anwerp by Marten Emperowr. Anno M.D.xxxiiij.’ The folios run to cccc, after which are two tables, one containing 16 pages, the other 5 pages. The signatures run in eights, and a lull page has 33 lines. ***The volume has marginal references and notes, some of the latter are in the Roman letter—it has wood-cuts in the Revelations, also some small ones at the beginning of the Gospel and of some of the Epistles. St. Matthew begins on fol. ii. St. Mark, on xlv. b. Acts, on clvi. b. Romans, on cexx. b. Ephesians, on cclxxviii. b. James, on cccxlviii. b. Revelations, on ccclv.**** See Cotton’s List of Editions of the Bible, pp. 3, 89, 96-7, and 129-30. (The bibliographer’s manual of English literature, Volume 2 By William Thomas Lowndes, page 1791)
Notes!
Ummm...I pointed that out in the previous post.
And of course, More opposed BOTH editions on the basis that the common man wasn’t capable of handling the Word of God.
Sorry. The 1526 edition did NOT have notes. I have a facsimile of the entire edition published by the British Museum. NO NOTES in the 1526 edition.
The 1534 did have notes. A pirated version of the 1534 edition did NOT have notes. But all editions were opposed by More.
You wrote:
“Odd. He approved the deaths of ‘heretics’ in England, and supported the efforts to find and stop Tyndale. He was NOT just concerned with traffic laws!”
It is not odd that he - the chancellor of England - would support long standing ENGLISH SECULAR LAW. What would be odd is for anyone to assume an English secular official could try someone in an ecclesiastical court on the continent. Of course, some Protestants are that odd.
“More was out of power by the time of Tyndale’s betrayal and trial. However, while he could, he supported the efforts to find and kill William Tyndale. That the efforts bore fruit after More’s fall was not More’s fault.”
More always supported truth over Protestant heresy.
“More hated Tyndale, and did his best to stop the Tyndale’s translation since it was designed to be read by commoners.”
Actually I think there is little evidence that More hated anyone. More knew Tyndale to be a dangerous heretic. He used the same invective against Tyndale the heretic that Tyndwas always used against heretics. Also, More - who knew of translations in the vernacular - never opposed them in themselves.
” This is not open to doubt, since More wrote extensively about it.”
No, actually he didn’t.
You need to study history more. More was not subtle in his hatred for Tyndale. He made every effort to capture him while More was in power. He failed, but the ball he started rolling kept rolling.
Tyndale did NOT reply with the vindictiveness shown by More.
And yes, More opposed vernacular translations in the hands of commoners. He didn’t mind the nobility reading them, but he openly opposed commoners getting their hands on scripture. He also didn’t realize the vernacular translation he was comfortable with came from the ‘heretic’ Wycliffe.
Okay, so he didn’t write these?
What ARE you trying to say?
Also, his contemporaries speak about glosses sewn into the same volume as the New Testament:
In right humble maner I commende me vnto your goode Lordeshippe, Doynge the same tundrestand, that I lately receyued your letters dated at your manor of Lambethe, the xxvj daie of the moneth of Maij. by the whiche I do perceyue that youre grace hath lately goten into your handes all the bokes of the newe testamente translated into Englesshe and pryented beyonde the see aswele those with the gloses ioyned vnto theym as thoder without the gloses,1 by meanes of exchaunge by you made therfore to the somme of lxi]l. ixs. iu]d? (Letter of Richard Nix, Bishop of Norwich, to the Archbishop of Canterbury, June 14, 1527. Printed from Cotton MS. Vitellius B, IX, 117.)
You wrote:
“You need to study history more.”
I already know history well.
“More was not subtle in his hatred for Tyndale.”
I think More hated what Tyndale did. I think it is clear he used the same invective that was always used against heretics, and with good reason.
“He made every effort to capture him while More was in power.”
Since Tyndale was a heretic and criminal that would make perfect sense at the time.
“He failed, but the ball he started rolling kept rolling.”
Heresy was still heresy and still a violation of the law. Inevitably Tyndale would have been arrested because of his own crimes and stupidity.
“Tyndale did NOT reply with the vindictiveness shown by More.”
No, he just kept spreading heresy.
“And yes, More opposed vernacular translations in the hands of commoners.”
False.
” He didn’t mind the nobility reading them, but he openly opposed commoners getting their hands on scripture.”
False.
” He also didn’t realize the vernacular translation he was comfortable with came from the ‘heretic’ Wycliffe.”
First of all, as shown by Gasquet, there is reason to believe Wycliffe’s Bible was actually an adaptation of a commonly copied Catholic vernacular Bible. If More didn’t realize that the translation he had was from Wycliffe, that would merely prove how common Catholic made and approved translations were in his day. I love it when anti-Catholics undermine their pet claims!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
