2

October 17, 1521: Pope Leo X Awards King Henry VIII the Title of Defender of the Faith

Cromwell: In the June of 1521 the King published a book. A theological work. It was called, A Defence of the Seven Sacraments.

More: For which he was named “Defender of the Faith” by His Holiness, the Pope.

Cromwell: By the Bishop of Rome, or do you insist on “pope”?

More: No. “Bishop of Rome” if you like.  It doesn’t alter his authority.

Cromwell: Thank you. You come to the point very readily. What is that authority? For example, in the Church of England…
…what exactly is the Bishop of Rome’s authority?

More: You will find it very ably set out and defended, Master Secretary……in the King’s book.

Cromwell: In the book published under the King’s name, would be more accurate. -You wrote this book.

More: -I wrote no part of it.

Cromwell: I don’t mean you actually held the pen.

More: I answered to my best ability, some points of common law……which the King put to me, as I was bound to do.

Cromwell: Do you deny you instigated it?

More: It was from first to last the King’s own project.

Cromwell: The King says not.

More: The King knows the truth of it. And whatever he may have said to you……he will not give evidence to support this accusation.

Cromwell: Why not?

More: Because evidence is given on oath, and he will not perjure himself. If you don’t know that, then you don’t yet know him.

Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons

 

Four hundred and ninety-six years since Pope Leo X bestowed upon King Henry VIII the title of Defender of the Faith for The Defense of The Seven Sacraments, an attack upon Luther.  Henry had well earned the honor.  Of all the initial anti-Lutheran polemics by Catholics, The Defense is head and shoulders the best:

 

Seeing, therefore, he despiseth all men and believes none, he ought not to take it ill if everybody discredit him again.  I am so far from holding any further dispute with him that I almost repent myself of what I have already argued against him.  For what avails it to dispute against one who disagrees with everyone, even with himself?  Who affirms in one place what he denies in another, denying what he presently affirms?  Who, if you object faith, combats by reason; if you touch him with reason, pretends faith?  If you allege philosophers, he flies to Scripture; if you propound Scripture, he trifles with sophistry.  Who is ashamed of nothing, fears none, and thinks himself under no law.  Who contemns the ancient Doctors of the church, and derides the new ones in the highest degree; loads with reproaches the Chief Bishop of the church.  Finally, he so undervalues customs, doctrine, manners, laws, decrees and faith of the church (yea, the whole church itself) that he almost denies there is any such thing as a church, except perhaps such a one as himself makes up of two or three heretics, of whom himself is chief.  .  .  .  

 

Luther thought it was so effective that he wrote a scurrilous attack against Henry, filled with the barnyard insults that Luther specialized in.  Then Saint Thomas More entered the lists and responded in defense of the King.

All of this of course is deeply ironic in light of Henry’s later rebellion against the Church, however when we put our thoughts down in writing they take on a life of their own.  The Defense of the Seven Sacraments has justly retained its popularity down through the centuries with Catholics.  Henry’s successors have kept the title of Defender of the Faith, even though the faith they purport to defend is the not the Faith that Henry resoundingly defended in the book that earned the title.

6

Fortnight For Freedom: Saint Thomas More and Saint John Fisher v. Henry VIII

 Fortnight For Freedom 2015

A spot of blood and grease on the pages of English history.

Charles Dickens, referring to King Henry VIII

For English speaking Catholics, June 22 is a bright day on the calendar of the Saints.  On this day we remember the two saints who stood against King Henry VIII, for the great principal that the State must never be allowed to control the Church.  Much that we Americans celebrate as freedom was born out of Church-State struggles down through the ages.  Sometimes those who stood against the State fell in the struggle, but the concept that the State is not absolute, that there are limits to its authority, is one of the great gifts of the Catholic Middle Ages to all of mankind.  It is only in modern times, since 1500, that the heresy that the State may exercise absolute authority has been a constant source of misery and strife in the history of the West.

When he ascended to the throne of England Henry VIII was popularly known as the Golden Hope of England.  His father Henry VII had never been loved by the people of England:  a miser and a distinctly unheroic figure no matter what Shakespeare would write in Richard III.  He had brought the end of the War of the Roses and peace to England, but that was about as much credit as his subjects would give the grasping, unlovable Henry Tudor.  His son by contrast looked like an Adonis when young, strong and athletic.  He had a sharp mind and had been well-educated, intended, ironically, for a career in the Church before the death of his elder brother Arthur.  He was reputed, correctly, to be pious.  He had considerable charism in his youth and knew how to make himself loved with a well timed laugh or smile, and loved he was, by the nobles, commons, his wife Katherine, and the Church.  Few reigns started more auspiciously than that of Henry, eighth of that name.

By the end of his reign he was widely despised by most his subjects.  Called a crowned monster behind his back, his reign had brought religious turmoil to England and domestic strife.  The best known symbols of his reign were the headman’s axe, the stake and the boiling pot in which he had some of the luckless individuals who roused his fury boiled to death.

It of course is small wonder for a Catholic to have little love for Henry VIII and his reign, but the distaste for Henry extends well beyond members of the Church.  Winston Churchill, the great English statesman and historian, in his magisterial History of the English Speaking Peoples has this to say about the executions of Saint Thomas More and Saint John Fisher:

The resistance of More and Fisher to the royal supremacy in Church government was a heroic stand.  They realised the defects of the existing Catholic system, but they hated and feared the aggressive nationalism which was destroying the unity of Christendom.  They saw that the break with Rome carried with it the risk of a despotism freed from every fetter.  More stood forth as the defender of all that was finest in the medieval outlook.  He represents to history its universality, its belief in spiritual values, and its instinctive sense of otherworldliness.  Henry VIII with cruel axe decapitated not only a wise and gifted counselor, but a system which, though it had failed to live up to its ideals in practice, had for long furnished mankind with its brightest dreams.” Continue Reading