From the Catholic Encyclopedia, but this has been documented everywhere and, sorry to say it's all too true:
Within three years of his death the archbishop had been canonized as a martyr. Though far from a faultless character, Thomas Becket, when his time of testing came, had the courage to lay down his life to defend the ancient rights of the Church against an aggressive state. The discovery of his hairshirt and other evidences of austerity, and the many miracles which were reported at his tomb, increased the veneration in which he was held. The shrine of the "holy blessed martyr," as Chaucer called him, soon became famous, and the old Roman road running from London to Canterbury known as "Pilgrim's Way." His tomb was magnificently adorned with gold, silver, and jewels, only to be despoiled by Henry VIII; the fate of his relics is uncertain. They may have been destroyed as a part of Henry's policy to subordinate the English Church to the civil authority. Mementoes of this saint are preserved at the cathedral of Sens. The feast of St. Thomas of Canterbury is now kept throughout the Roman Catholic Church, and in England he is regarded as the protector of the secular clergy.
'in England he is regarded as the protector of the secular clergy.'
I find this amusing, but feel certain that Becket would find it appalling.
I've read some very interesting ideas and posts here. While I agree with that Henry II was right, to the modern, humanist mind, Becket feared for the King's soul as well as agitating for ecclesiastical courts in England at the time. I thought another bone of contention was Becket's power to excommunicate the nobleman who murdered the priest -- that certainly was with his purvue, irrespective of what the King thought. It would appear that many of these issues were settled in the ensuing centuries, until the matter of
Papal Primacy reared its head during the reign of Henry VIII. Had Charles V not been the Holy Roman Emperor AND nephew of Catherine of Aragon, the dispensation to the first dispensation
may very well have been granted - although I maintain, an English Reformation was in the offing and would have happened, inevitably.
The parallels between Becket and Thomas More are fascinating -- though More was never Archbishop of Canterbury and Becket, according to the film, realized he had to 'render under God' and, indeed could not serve two masters.
In America, when we argue over church and state, we should think about these matters and understand why the Founding Fathers advocated so strenuosly for no established religion. But they were visionaries and students of history both.
I'll leave it there.
If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything.
reply
share