The break with Rome

1. 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 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

2. 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 case
She 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 England
The Court
April 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 brief
A 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 delay
Wolsey 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 court
Campeggio 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

3. 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 Fall
Henry 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

4. 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 Boleyn
Wanted to preserve Tudor dynasty
Believed that his first marriage contravened
God’s laws
Extension Exercise
Interview with Wolsey
Use categories in the
table
1. Split class into 1/3rds
2. Each third is split into
supporters and
opponents of Wolsey
3. Opponents ask
questions of Wolsey
4. Answers are recorded
5. Plenary re: Q & A
Conclusion: assessing Wolsey’s policies &
administration
Complete the following table in pairs:
Success Failure
Church
Justice
Finance
Enclosure
The Divorce
The table could be filled in via the Extension Exercise

5. 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 on
the 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/colle
ctanea/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.

6. 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 Cromwell
Thomas 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 Supremacy
In 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 D
Why 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

7. 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: annates
Payments 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
Opposition
The 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

8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPciZr-jXn8
8
pp. 102-103
Opportunity
August 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-jXn8
Mary told of the marriage

9. 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 1534
The 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 church
revenue 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

10. 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 Kent
She 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 Orders
Henry faced some opposition from 2 religious houses in London.
The Observant Friars
Potentially dangerous as itinerant preachers, they could criticise
religious developments quickly. All 7 observant houses were closed
down. Many friars were imprisoned.
The Carthusians
They 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 Reaction
He 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: £300
This was bound to be a temporary respite as both men stood on
principle…
How widespread?
How dealt with?
And Score 1 to 10

11. 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…
Reputations
Henry 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 More
More 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.yout
ube.com/watch
?v=SGlFPwlRs
cM&feature=r
Conclusion
So 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 Law
2. Loyalty to the Tudor dynasty ahead of Rome

12. 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

13. 13
Thomas Cromwell No Mercy
Final Summary
Make your own spider diagrams of the information on p. 115, relating to:
• KNOWLEDGE FOCUS
• SKILLS FOCUS