Jonathan Meneses

Mr Galanis

AP European

25 September 2010

A Man for All Seasons Reflection

Thomas More was an extremely famous and widely respected man. He was an advisor to the

king, a battler of words with Martin Luther, and a philosophical writer. Lastly, he was devoted to his

God. This intense devotion to his ideals and convictions cost him his life.

Henry VIII was seeking an annulment of his marriage to Queen Catherine, which was sanctioned

by the pope. He had the approval of the people, the power of Parliament behind him, and the ability to

do whatever he wanted. However, the Pope, having issued a decree allowing the marriage of Henry to

his brother’s widow, Queen Catherine, refused to annul the marriage between the two. Doing so would

compromise the infallibility of the Pope. The death of Chancellor Wolsey gave Henry the opportunity to

appoint a more competent servant who would be able to reverse the Pope’s decision.

The most suited man for this job was Thomas More. However, more did not agree with

overthrowing the Pope’s supremacy. The heart of the matter for More was the fact that he was faithful

to God, and did not have it within his conscience to allow the annulment of the sacred bond between

man and woman. Henry, however, hoped to use More to his political advantage. Henry saw the church

as a means for political power, where More vehemently opposed using religion and politics together.

Henry promised to keep More out of the conflict between church and state, but Thomas was

too popular and respected a figure to be ignored completely. Though Henry was backed by Parliament

and the English church when he took over the church in England, More’s silence was not easily ignored.

If he were to have complete power, he needed complete unity in public opinion. Furthermore, More
resigned from his position of Chancellor to keep a clean conscience. In legal terms, More’s silence could

be seen as consent, but the country knew he disagreed.

Unable to squeeze a confession and recognition of the new queen out of More, Henry had him

put on trial (his new Chancellor, Cromwell leading the charge). The trial itself was unfair, as the Court

already had its decision. The “jury” set to decide More’s fate was not even allowed to discuss before

they gave his fate. However, despite sure death in an unfair execution, More stood up for his beliefs.

The question of whether or not More’s execution was justified depends on what view the

observer takes of religion. If religion is to be used as a source of power, then More’s execution was

necessary for the preservation of the state. However, if religion is to be held sacred, Henry had no place

meddling in the affairs of the divine. Personally, I believe that Henry made the right decision for the

perpetuation of power, but did so with less than honorable morals.