“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.
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.