Thomas More’s Quarrel with Reform

In letters to family and friends while he was confined in the Tower of London in 1534 and the first few months of 1535, Thomas More explained his refusal to comply with the first Act of Succession with the argument that his allegiance was to a council higher than the parliament of England. The “high...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Rockett, Gordon William (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Brill 2012
In: Church history and religious culture
Year: 2012, Volume: 92, Issue: 2/3, Pages: 201-236
Further subjects:B Tudor England consensus fidelium Thomas More More’s trial
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1536918709
003 DE-627
005 20220604113759.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 160405s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1163/18712428-09220002  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1536918709 
035 |a (DE-576)466918704 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ466918704 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Rockett, Gordon William  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Thomas More’s Quarrel with Reform 
264 1 |c 2012 
300 |a Online-Ressource 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a In letters to family and friends while he was confined in the Tower of London in 1534 and the first few months of 1535, Thomas More explained his refusal to comply with the first Act of Succession with the argument that his allegiance was to a council higher than the parliament of England. The “higher council” to which More referred was the General Council of Christendom, whose determinations embodied Christianity’s canonically enjoined consensus fidelium and therefore held precedence over laws enacted by lesser assemblies such as England’s parliaments. Ecclesiastical consensus was the foundation of all More believed. It was the test that screened Catholic from heretical doctrine, and it was infallible. But More could not lawfully adhere to the principle of consensus and at the same time swear to uphold the royal supremacy enacted in 1534 because the king’s supremacy in the English church implicitly asserted England’s separateness and therefore broke up Christianity’s consensual uniformity. Thus the oath of allegiance to the first Act of Succession was one of several pieces of legislation that More could not in conscience obey. 
650 4 |a Tudor England  |x consensus fidelium  |x Thomas More  |x More’s trial 
773 0 8 |i In  |t Church history and religious culture  |d Leiden : Brill, 2006  |g 92(2012), 2/3, Seite 201-236  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)521455545  |w (DE-600)2260084-X  |w (DE-576)271497904  |x 1871-2428  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:92  |g year:2012  |g number:2/3  |g pages:201-236 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18712428-09220002  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 92  |j 2012  |e 2/3  |h 201-236 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 2916298800 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1536918709 
LOK |0 005 20170808153229 
LOK |0 008 160404||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a bril 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL