the break 2011a

13
Key Questions Chronology: pp. 82, 98 Why did Henry seek an annulment of his marriage to Catherine ? What were the consequences of Henry’s failure to attain a divorce through Rome? What was the Role of the Reformation Parliament 1529-32? How did royal policy change in the years 1529-32? 1. Using source A, the text (inc. biography) and your own knowledge, explain why Henry wished to annul his marriage. 2. Why was Henry convinced that he could gain papal approval for his annulment? (84) 4. Why was his case actually quite difficult to sustain? (84) [Consider Deuteronomy; canon law; consummation] Was Henry motivated by lust or pragmatism ? (85-86) 1. Who had Anne intended to marry and who prevented this from happening? 2. Explain fully why the King decided to divorce Catherine. 3. Clarify the two lines of argument that Henry could pursue with regard to the ‘Great Matter’ in the box ‘Exam Tip’ Why did Henry have problems gaining a divorce through Rome , 1527-29 ? (87-89) Henry had to secure a divorce through Rome if it was to be seen as legitimate. Henry had to show that his marriage was invalid from the very beginning. 1. Emperor Charles V Controlled the Pope Charles was superior in the Habsburg-Valois conflict, so the Pope could not ignore him. His situation worsened when in May 1527, Imperial troops sacked Rome and made Clement VII a virtual prisoner. An annulment was unlikely, given that Charles was Catherine’s nephew ! 2. Wolsey and the Papal Situation As papal legate and cardinal , Wolsey tried to get the French cardinals to agree to a council of leading archbishops to pronounce on a divorce. He failed. He had made the situation more difficult by switching the alliance with the Emperor (via Spain) to Francis I of France. He hoped an alliance (i.e. the Treaty of Westminster) might pressure the Emperor into negotiations over Henry’s marriage to Catherine. Or it might break the Emperor’s hold over Italy. This was dependent upon a resurgence of France in northern Italy – but the Emperor defeated France. Wolsey had backed the wrong side. When Clement was freed in December 1529, he was still controlled by Charles V. Consequences : The nobility were cross with Wolsey - they were Francophobe It weakened Henry VIII over the ‘Great Matter’ John Guy http://www.tudors.org/ asa2-level/123-henry- viiis-reformation.html INCLUDEPICTURE "http: Wolsey and the Divorce http://www.historyonthenet .com/Chronology/timelineb reakrome.htm

Upload: thomasadamsmedia

Post on 17-Jul-2015

176 views

Category:

Education


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The break 2011a

1

Key Questions Chronology: pp. 82, 98• Why did Henry seek an annulment of his marriage to Catherine ?• What were the consequences of Henry’s failure to attain a divorce through Rome?• What was the Role of the Reformation Parliament 1529-32?• How did royal policy change in the years 1529-32?

1. Using source A, the text (inc. biography) and your own knowledge, explain why Henry wished to annul his marriage.

2. Why was Henry convinced that he could gain papal approvalfor his annulment? (84)

4. Why was his case actually quite difficult to sustain? (84)[Consider Deuteronomy; canon law; consummation]

Was Henry motivated by lust or pragmatism? (85-86)

1. Who had Anne intended to marry and who prevented this from happening?

2. Explain fully why the King decided to divorce Catherine.

3. Clarify the two lines of argument that Henry could pursue with regard to the ‘Great Matter’ in the box ‘Exam Tip’

Why did Henry have problems gaining a divorce through Rome , 1527-29 ? (87-89)

Henry had to secure a divorce through Rome if it was to be seen as legitimate. Henry had to show that his marriage was invalid from the very beginning.

1. Emperor Charles V Controlled the Pope

Charles was superior in the Habsburg-Valois conflict, so the Pope could not ignore him. His situation worsened when in May 1527, Imperial troops sacked Rome and made Clement VII a virtual prisoner. An annulment was unlikely, given that Charles was Catherine’s nephew!

2. Wolsey and the Papal Situation

As papal legate and cardinal, Wolsey tried to get the French cardinals to agree to a council of leading archbishops to pronounce on a divorce. He failed.

He had made the situation more difficult by switching the alliance with the Emperor (via Spain) to Francis I of France. He hoped an alliance (i.e. the Treaty of Westminster) might pressure the Emperor into negotiations over Henry’s marriage to Catherine. Or it might break the Emperor’s hold over Italy. This was dependent upon a resurgence of France in northern Italy – but the Emperor defeated France. Wolsey had backed the wrong side. When Clement was freed in December 1529, he was still controlled by Charles V. Consequences:

• The nobility were cross with Wolsey - they were Francophobe

• It weakened Henry VIII over the ‘Great Matter’

John Guyhttp://www.tudors.org/asa2-level/123-henry-viiis-reformation.html

INCLUDEPICTURE "http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Afy45JnWpyKG7M:http://www.havelshouseofhistory.com/Wolsey%2520Portrait.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATINET Wolsey and the Divorce

http://www.historyonthenet.com/Chronology/timelinebreakrome.htm

Page 2: The break 2011a

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-MYFw896pk&feature=related

2

3. Solve the Great Matterin England: but Clement unhelpful

Wolsey wanted the Pope to grant him the power to decide the case in England without the right of appeal. But the Pope wanted to pacify Henry VIII and Emperor Charles V. So Clement suggested:

a) Henry was to divorce in England, marry Anne and get an annulment later, possibly after Catherine had died. The Pope was suggesting bigamy. Naturally Henry refused.

b) The Pope told Cardinal Campeggio, his legate, to suggest that Catherine might enter a nunnery and take her monastic vows allowing Henry to remarry.She refused!

c) He also told Campeggio, that given the pressure on both sides, the court could not come to a conclusion. He should use delaying tactics (Read p. 88)

4. Catherine’s Obstinacy: Why?

Her caseShe had truth and God on her side. She insisted that she was a virgin and that that Henry’s Levitical line did not apply to an unconsummated marriage. Catherine wanted to defend the legality of her marriage of 18 years; she wanted to defend her daughter Mary’s legitimacy. If she had not, it would have meant that she had been no more than a royal mistress and Mary just a royal bastard.

Her support• She had supporters at court• She had supporters in the church – such as

Bishop John Fisher• She had the sympathy of important men

such as the humanist, Thomas More.• She had sympathy amongst the common

people. Many felt that she was being cast aside simply because of his passion for a younger woman.

* *Catherine’s determined opposition together with her bloodline (Chales V!) was a central reason for Wolsey’s failure to attain an annulment.

5. The Failure of the Blackfriars Court in EnglandThe CourtApril 1528, Clement was finally granted the commission to try the case in England. October 1528, Campeggio arrived, but Imperial power had by now been confirmed in northern Italy. Wolsey’s French alliance was worthless. A papal annulment was even more unlikely.

The Spanish briefA letter from Julius II of 1503 in Spanish hands confirmed Catherine’s version of events; she was lawfully married to Henry VIII. The brief again delayed the hearing. The English argued it was a fake; its timing does suggest this. The Spanish refused to let Henry see the letter.

Wolsey and the delayWolsey wanted to start the case as swiftly as possible for fear that Charles V would revoke the case to Rome. 31st March: the court opened at Blackfriars – but in fact Campeggio was under strict orders not to come to a decision on the Great Matter. Proceedings dragged on when in the summer, Campeggio used papal jurisdiction to adjourn.Catherine and the court

• She denied the authority of the Court.• She appealed to Rome – and then walked out!

Wolsey and the courtCampeggio allowed the proceedings to drag on and adjourned the case for the summer. It was clear that the court would come to no judgement:

• Wolsey had failed to get the divorce• Wolsey’s continuance in power depended on Henry’s confidence: he had lost it.• Henry would remove Wolsey because of his failure: he did not need to be told by

the Dukes of Norfolk or Suffolk

Page 3: The break 2011a

3

Royal policy in the years 1529-1532

Was there no clear royal policy?Elton argues that there was no clear policy:

• Henry did not have a clear plan for an annulment; he dismissed Wolsey, only to replace him as chancellor with Thomas More, who actually sympathised with Catherine!

• Henry was ambivalent. (a) Ideally, he wanted an annulment through Rome in order to ensure the legitimacy of his marriage to Anne Boleyn.(b) Increasingly however, Henry found an ‘English’ rather than a papal solution appealing, since it enhanced his power. By 1532, this had become his choice

• 1529-32: Henry still insisted on trying to secure a solution through Rome while pursuing a legislative programme in the Reformation Parliament which undermined the power of Rome. Another dimension in this period was Henry’s desire to stamp his authority over the English clergy.

What was the role of the Reformation Parliament, 1529? (90-91)It passed anti-clerical legislation and the idea was to put pressure on Rome to grant his divorce. While the acts should be understood in the context of Wolsey’s fall, they should also be seen as part of anti-clerical feeling at the time as illustrated by the common lawyer, Simon Fish and his 1529, A Supplication of the Beggars. Fish was calling on Henry to reform a corrupt clergy. This anti-clericalism was the context for Henry’s beginning to assert his authority over the English clergy. He did this by targeting his erstwhile loyal servant, Wolsey.

• The Mortuaries Act – almost certainly passed to remind people of the Hunne Case and Wolsey’s attempt to defuse the situation in a way that did not damage the Church.

• The Pluralities Act – to remind people of Wolsey’s sins in this area• The Probate Act – aimed again at Wolsey who had tried to take over probate jurisdiction

as legate.

Wolsey’s FallHenry had Wolsey charged with praemunire: i.e. accusing him of using his power as cardinal legate to favour papal power over Henry’s royal power. This echoes Henry’s later views on the Royal Supremacy. Henry believed that Wolsey’s legatine powers would deliver him the divorce. The fact that he had been made Legate a latere simply increased Henry’s expectations – and disappointment. The charge started Wolsey’s fall – due to his failure, but it also exerted pressure on Clement by reminding him of the English Church’s independent decisions.

Wolsey retired to his archbishopric of York and continued to live in splendour. He had done all that he could; his failure was due to forces beyond his control. Yet Henry’s ego had been dented and Wolsey was blamed for the failure at Blackfriars. In November 1530, his enemies on the council had Wolsey arrested and on his way to face charges of treason in London. The Cardinal died at Leicester Abbey on 24th November 1530.

Skills Builder (95)

(b) Do you agree with the view expressed in Source K that the diplomatic situation was the main reason for Henry’s failure to attain an annulment of his marriage to Catherine by 1529?

On pages 94-97, Armstrong shows how to analyse the sources, with advice on categorisation, evaluation and source knowledge and own knowledge. The Skills Focus, p. 97 summarises the skills.

Pendrill,67-77

Page 4: The break 2011a

4

Questioning Papal Authority?

Henry happy to challenge papal authority with his Levitical line

Wolsey did not want to challenge papal authority; but his attempt to find technical failings with the original papal dispensation was ignored

Wolsey’s Failure and Removal

His inability to secure a decision at the Blackfriars court via Campeggio led to his fall.

Foreign Affairs: the Emperor and the Pope

1525-6: Wolsey’s diplomatic revolution: but siding with France meant that he could not influence Charles V.

Charles V’s troops sacked Rome. He replaced France in northern Italy. Clement VII was a prisoner of Charles V.

Oops. Charles V was the nephew of Catherine of Aragon…Wolsey was simply unable to solve Henry’s Great Matter.

Wolsey replaced by Radicals

Cromwell and Cranmer became more important at court precisely because they did seem to be able to solve Henry’s Great Matter.

The Reformation Parliament, Henry VIII’s ambiguity and the Royal Supremacy

The fact of the Reformation Parliament was not an indication that Henry sought to break with Rome; indeed, he sought to use it to pressure the Pope into granting the divorce. Yet, the direction of policy was unclear, because Henry was willing to listen to more radical suggestions from reformers. It was not until May 1532 that Henry secured the Submission of the Clergy.For more on the points in this box, see next set of notes

Henry wanted a divorce because he:

Loved Anne BoleynWanted to preserve Tudor dynastyBelieved that his first marriage contravened God’s laws

Extension ExerciseInterview with WolseyUse categories in the table1. Split class into 1/3rds2. Each third is split into supporters and opponents of Wolsey3. Opponents ask questions of Wolsey4. Answers are recorded 5. Plenary re: Q & A

Conclusion: assessing Wolsey’s policies & administration

Complete the following table in pairs: Success Failure

ChurchJusticeFinanceEnclosureThe Divorce

The table could be filled in via the Extension Exercise

Page 5: The break 2011a

Analyse the biographies of Thomas Cromwell and Thomas Cranmer identifying through a number of bullet points both their offices & their role in furthering the Henrician Reformation.

5

Key Questions

• Did Henry’s policy change, 1529-32?• How was the attack on the English Church carried out?• How did Acts of Parliament secure the break with Rome and the Royal

Supremacy?• How serious was opposition to the break with Rome and the Royal Supremacy?• Why was there so little opposition to the Royal Supremacy?

Were Henry’s views on the Great Matter changing by 1530? (91-92)

A) Strengthening his existing Levitical case: opinion of European Universities

Naturally, he bribed them all. Their findings were published in 1531. Seven of them supported:• His Levitical line that his marriage contravened divine law• That the Pope had no authority to dispense such marriages.

More had report these findings to parliament – but did not actually agree with any of them!

B) Pressure on the pope: controlling the clergy, Wolsey and mass praemunire

February 1531: the English Church was forced to pay a fine for endorsing Wolsey’s papal posts. Indeed, the whole clergy was charged with praemunire. £118,000 was paid. Rome was being pressured and again Henry was stamping his authority on the clergy.

C) The radical option: the idea of the Royal Supremacy: the Pardon of the Clergy

In 1530, Henry’s backers, Edward Foxe and Thomas Cranmer, presented him with the Collectanea satis copiosa. Henry was attracted by the possibility of extending his power over the Church and getting the English clergy to pronounce on his divorce.

1531: in his Pardon of the Clergy, Henry insisted onthe title ‘sole protector and Supreme Head of the English Church and clergy’. Bishop Fisher, a diehard conservative, insisted that the words ‘as far as Christ’s law allows’ should be added. Clearly, however, the radical option was becoming more and more appealing increasing the significance of the radical faction at court: especially Thomas Cromwell & Thomas Cranmer.

http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/onlineex/henryviii/videos/collectanea/video.html

Collectanea satis copiosa

It referred to Anglo-Saxon chronicles and ancient English manuscripts which supported the concept of the King as head of state and Church .Thus historical precedents had been found or invented to support the idea of the Royal Supremacy.

Analyse the biographies of Thomas Cromwell (and use Source G) and Thomas Cranmer.Identify through bullet points their origins, offices & role in furthering the Henrician Reformation.

Page 6: The break 2011a

6

(99-105)Thus the ambiguity of 1529-32 (see page 3) was replaced by a definite policy:

• The legislative independence of the English Church was destroyed• The Royal Supremacy and ‘national sovereignty’ was established & papal power

destroyed

How important was Thomas Cromwell in the formation and execution of the Royal Supremacy? (92-93, 99-100)

Thomas CromwellThomas Cromwell was the architect of the break with Rome through statute – and it was through statute that the fabric and structure of the Church of England was changed. Thus Cromwell was effectively Wolsey’s replacement.

The Royal SupremacyIn 1531 the Church had been forced to acknowledge Henry’s title ‘Supreme Head of the Church in England – as far as the law of Christ allows. But this was a paper title and still deeply ambiguous.

Clearly further action was necessary to resolve any ambiguities

Cromwell and the Commons Supplication against the Ordinaries

This was a petition against Church courts and clerical jurisdiction that Cromwell introduced into the Commons. Cromwell was a brilliant political operator and he was able to convince the Commons that this was their idea and nothing at all to do with the King or the government. In fact, they were endorsing Henry’s attack on the legislative independence of the Church in England.

Purpose of the Supplication

• Cromwell called into question the power of church courts and criticised the abuse of their legislative authority and so sought to curb the legislative power of the Church. Convocation made laws concerning secular matters which contradicted the King’s laws and statutes

• The government was attacking the power of Convocation to make laws without the consent of the laity; in addition, laws were passed without the ‘most royal assent’

• Henry clearly approved of Cromwell’s actions and the Commons’ attack on Convocation.

Limited Opposition to the Changes

• Convocation was stunned, but could do little• Warham was too old to offer serious resistance• Opposition was even less likely when Henry declared that the clergy were but ‘half his

subjects’ since they took an oath to the Pope.

Source DWhy do you think Henry was able to ‘convince himself’ of his supremacy via the Collectanea satis copiosa?

Answer the question 1 and 2 on Source A and question 1 only on Source B on p. 99. On p.100, answer the question on Source C. These sources are all related.

Pendrill,89-94

Page 7: The break 2011a

7

(1) Act in Conditional Restraint of

Annates, 1532

Background (2)Henry knew that even if he got his clergy to give him his divorce, Catherine would appeal to the Pope.

Definition: annatesPayments made to the Pope by bishops taking up their sees (1/3 of their annual income).

Background (1) The pope would have been alarmed by their abolition since it was the main source of income from England.

Potential Papal

OppositionThe Pope might refuse to offer bulls of consecration for new bishops if no cash

Opposition in England• Henry had trouble trying to get both Houses to agree to the Bill. • The clergy were probably showing bitterness at the Submission• The Commons feared economic reprisals; e.g. Charles V ensuring disruption of

the wool trade with his territory of Flanders.• The bill not only undermined the Pope’s economic power, it undermined his

papal rights of consecration, i.e. his spiritual power, such radical legislation challenged centuries of traditional and practice – of concern in England and Europe! Hence the conditional nature.

The Bill: Significance of ‘Conditional’

Henry still hoped to gain the divorce via the pope.It was controversial! ( “.” )

The Bill: terms• Abolition of the payment of

annates• Bishops could now be

consecrated by English authority.

Henry & the Passage of the Bill

Given parliamentary divisions, Henry went to the Commons

(“That parliament was pressuring Henry to end payments to Rome – only Henry was holding them back! Leverage for granting his divorce?”)

Henry’s message

Consequences of the Submission

And Henry• Henry was established as the supreme legislator in England.• Convocation surrendered and was now powerless to withstand further attacks.• The road to the break with Rome and the Supremacy was clear.

And Politically• Thomas More resigned over the Submission and tried to get out of politics. He could not

reconcile his loyalty to the Crown with his loyalty to the Church• Thomas Cromwell was now the key figure at Court – and had more to do in order to

follow the logic of the Submission• The Church was effectively under Henry’s control – a further step needed to the break

with Rome. The process was already under way since in March 1532, parliament passed the Act in Conditional Restraint of Annates.

How did Acts of parliament secure the break with Rome and the Royal Supremacy?

The Significance of 1832: a watershed in Henry’s policy towards Rome• Henry had virtually given up on the annulment being granted in Rome by the Pope• Ann Boleyn was pregnant by December 1532; it was a matter of urgency that the divorce

be granted, and Henry marry in order to ensure the legitimacy of the child.• Armstrong questions how important this was; the idea of the Royal Supremacy appealed

to Henry’s enormous ego. Indeed, given that Anne had slept with Henry after all her delaying tactics indicates that a decision to further the Royal Supremacy had already been taken.

• 1532 saw the break with Rome and the Royal Supremacy become Cromwell and Henry’s first choice solution to the Great Matter

Pendrill,89-94

Page 8: The break 2011a

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPciZr-jXn8

8

pp. 102-103OpportunityAugust 1532: Archbishop Warham died. Henry could now appoint someone who would best further his divorce and so his Supremacy. Notice religion and politics combined.

Choice: Stephen Gardiner?

It should have been him. The Bishop of Winchester had been next in line, but had opposed the Submission of the Clergy.

Choice: Thomas Cranmer!

He was appointed – quickly. He came from obscurity. But he was linked to the Boleyn faction. By January 1533, it was clear that Anne was pregnant. Henry believed that Cranmer, a reformer, was more likely to give him the divorce and quickly.25th January: Anne and Henry were secretly married

The Search for Legitimacy

Henry did have the necessary papal bulls to consecrate Cranmer, but he had received no judgement on his marriage to Catherine. Now that Henry was married (with an heir on the way), Cromwell would have to pass statutes to ensure the legitimacy of the heir.

3. The Act in Restraint of Appeals,

1533

Terms (103)• All appeals to Rome were ended; all would heard by English courts• Any appeals relating to the King would go to Convocation and be

heard by the Archbishop of Canterbury

Political Significance

• Catherine could not challenge any legal decision on the Divorce made in England• So Cranmer was able to decide over Henry’s marriage to Catherine. May 1533: it

was declared void since the papal dispensation had been invalid. In June 1533: Anne was crowned Queen.

• The Royal Supremacy - This was clarified in full by the Act for the first time.- The body politic, both spiritual and temporal, was ‘bounden’ to the King. As England was an empire, Henry was in fact ‘Supreme Head and King’. The preamble to the Act justified the Supremacy on the basis of authentic histories and chronicles. This was deliberate, to suggest that old rights were being reasserted and not new rights asserted which undermined the Pope’s power.

• Papal reaction : excommunicated Henry ; Anne was declared not to be his wife.

3. Act of Dispensations

1534

Terms• All payments to Rome, including Peter’s Pence were stopped.• Now Canterbury, not Rome, would issue dispensations allowing

for exemptions or departures from canon law.• Ignoring the decree would lead to a charge of praemunire.

2. Further Acts in 1533

• The Submission of the Clergy was put into statutory form• Appeals to Rome were forbidden in any forms, not just in certain cases• The Act in Conditional Restraint of Annates was made permanent• English bishops were to be appointed by the King and not by Rome

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPciZr-jXn8Mary told of the marriage

Page 9: The break 2011a

9

.

4. Act of Succession,

1534

Terms• Henry’s marriage to Catherine was declared invalid; that to Anne

was declared valid.• The heirs of the first marriage were declared bastards, those of

the second, legitimate• An oath was introduced so that the nation became bound to the

new heir by swearing an allegiance to the new Queen and her children

• It was declared treasonable to speak ‘maliciously’ against the second marriage

Papal Response, March 1534The Pope reaffirmed Catherine’s marriage to Henry

Henry’s response:The Pope’s name was to be struck out of all prayer books

5. (a) The Act of Supremacy & (b) the Treason Law, 1534

(a) Terms of the Act of Supremacy • That the King and his heirs were ‘the only Supreme Head in

earth of the Church of England’• Thus Henry had complete administrative and legislative control

over the Church

(b) The Treason Law• This enforced the Supremacy by making it a capital offence to slander the

Supremacy or deny the King’s new title.• Nor could you speak out against Henry’s queen• This means that treason could be committed in word as well as deed

Significance of the Treason Law• Armstrong calls the act Henry’s ‘instrument of terror’ which introduced the ‘fear factor’

into his rule.• It was strengthened in 1535 and used to silence opponents

The Economic Consequences of the Royal Supremacy

With the Supremacy established, Henry could now exploit the wealth of the Church:• Henry banned payments to Rome, such as annates, the justification being that they

were too heavy for the Church to bear – yet Henry annexed First Fruits and Tenths to the Crown. [This meant that any new benefice holder was to pay one year’s income not to the Pope as before, but to the Crown]. After this, there was an annual levy of 1/10th the annual value of the benefice.

• Cromwell was commissioned to carry out a survey of ecclesiastical wealth detailing all clerical incomes. Henry could then have an up-to-date and accurate picture of churchrevenue and property.

Henry’s Financial gain?• 1485-1534: the clergy paid £4,800pa to Rome.• 1535: they paid c£46,000; 1536: over c£51,000!

Valor Ecclesiasticus: title page:www.learningcurve.gov.uk/.../hanry-

image1.htm

Clement VII

Page 10: The break 2011a

10

6. Act Extinguishing the Authority of the Bishop of Rome: This removed papal rights to preach and teach in England.

There were high profile opponents to the new order. Some therefore believed that opposition was widespread. Assess the evidence below. Was opposition widespread?

105-110

1. Elizabeth, Holy Maid of KentShe had visions of the Virgin Mary. Notorious in popular and learned circles. She was used to undermine Henry’s proposed marriage to Anne Boleyn; John Fisher backed her. When she prophesied that the King would be removed from the throne a month after his marriage, Henry had to act.

Solution• She was sent to the Tower. She was

executed with four followers.• Deliberately, she was executed on the same day as Londoners

were required to swear to the Oath of Succession(!)

How widespread? How dealt with?

And Score 1 to 10

2. London: Religious OrdersHenry faced some opposition from 2 religious houses in London.

The Observant FriarsPotentially dangerous as itinerant preachers, they could criticise religious developments quickly. All 7 observant houses were closed down. Many friars were imprisoned.

The CarthusiansThey were not united in their opposition to Henry. Cromwell replaced reasoned persuasion by imprisonment and torture. 6 leading Carthusians were executed between May to July 1535 in a brief period of terror.

How widespread? How dealt with?

And Score 1 to 10

3. The Bishops (108)Disagreement over the Supremacy amongst some bishops when the break with Rome became apparent:

(a) Archbishop Warham and Bishop Tunstall of Durham spoke against the King, questioning:• His motives and desire for a divorce• The rejection of papal supremacy.

They knew his mind could not be changed, and when danger lurked (Warham: ‘the wrath of the King is death.’) most fell into line.

(b) (i) John Fisher Bishop of Rochester• Supported for Catherine – writing and preaching in her defence• He was implicated in the Maid of Kent affair

Henry’s ReactionHe loathed Fisher, but recognised Fisher’s status and standing and possible negative responses to any violent action against him. Executing a bishop was a risky business.

• Fine: £300This was bound to be a temporary respite as both men stood on principle…

How widespread? How dealt with?

And Score 1 to 10

Page 11: The break 2011a

11

(ii) John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester• Fisher refused to swear the Oath of Succession in April 1534

since it would mean condemning Henry’s first marriage and included an implied condemnation of papal supremacy.

Reactions• Henry imprisoned him in the Tower• Fisher also had a direct line to Emperor Charles V through

Eustace Chapuys, the imperial ambassador. Chapuys begged Charles to invade several times. He did not.

• This was always unlikely, but Henry was angered. Fisher was found guilty of high treason and was executed in June 1535 – the first high profile martyr of the Henrician reformation.

• Outrage swept Catholic Europe…

ReputationsHenry had clearly shown that no-one was beyond the law of the land; he was tough, while others saw him as tyrannical. Certainly executing a relatively old and respected clergymen, did little for his reputation.

How widespread? How dealt with?

And Score 1 to 10

4. Sir Thomas MoreMore as a Problem? Or was it Henry?

• On one level, he was not. More could be pragmatic – the change in the succession had happened and he could nothing to reverse it.

• However, he would not compromise his conscience by swearing to the idea that the King of England had always been supreme head of the Church of England, with parliament merely reasserting an existing right (as suggested in the Collecteana satis copiosa)

• For him it was a religious obligation to defend the Catholic Church• He was a dangerous opponent as he had a European reputation

as a humanist scholar based on his book Utopia, 1516• Yet Henry made him a problem. He chose him as chancellor

knowing that he was not on his side in his ‘Great Matter’.• Cromwell and Cranmer trusted More’s promises not to oppose the

King. It was the King that created More’s public opposition by insisting that he take the oath in 1534. But more could neither approve the Boleyn marriage nor condemn papal jurisdiction

Accusations and execution• He had caused the King to increase the power of the Pope by

getting the King to write the Assertion of the Seven Sacraments.• Tried and found guilty of treason on the unsupported and perjured

evidence of Sir Richard Rich, the solicitor general. Executed.

More’s Defence• His defence is justifiably famous. He defended himself brilliantly

arguing that parliament simply had no right to bind men’s consciences by making them swear an Oath of Supremacy.

• More attacked the tyrannical nature of Henry’s England that did not allow for freedom of conscience. Here More undoubtedly held the high moral ground.

• He had never incited opposition to the Crown (unlike Fisher).

How widespread? How dealt with?

And Score 1 to 10

http://en.gloria.tv/?media=47824

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGlFPwlRscM&feature=r

ConclusionSo while there was some high profile opposition, there was never a coherent organised party which tried to resist change. Opposition was rare for two key reasons:

1. Fear of arrest and torture due to the Treason Law2. Loyalty to the Tudor dynasty ahead of Rome

Page 12: The break 2011a

12

Put the relevant information from pp. 113-114 in the boxes below; or use your own format.

Little Change Local Affairs

Loyalty to the King

Oaths of Loyalty