Oh yes indeed so, magnificent. I don't know if Paul Scofield is Roman Catholic or not, but his Performance as St Thomas More was brilliant, and a great film, and a much better portrayel of the role than the modern TV version of St Thomas More
It's interesting to note that he St Thomas More is remembered much more favourably than King Henry the 8th, or Anne Bolyn, Cromwell, I think that speaks for itself
@@ThurstonWhore1 Burning at the stake was an awful, awful practice. Thomas More though, out of all the hideous characters of that era (especially Henry VIIIth) was a good man and strived to be righteous - for that alone, he deserves our respect.
Someone who sent people to burn alive for owning a Bible in English (their own native tongue) does not deserve any form of respect, the man was a murderer yet thanks to religion he's become a Patrion Saint. Religion makes good people do & say bad things, all you need to do is read the comments on here to realise this, "Oh burning people was very bad, he might have burnt a few, but he was a righteous man who deserved our respect" I think it's fair to say we both differ on who we choose to respect.
@@ThurstonWhore1 So what are you saying, that we have to respect the protestant reformers? people like Cranmer and Cromwell who sent people to their deaths? Later, Oliver Cromwell committed genocide by murdering hundreds and thousands of children, women and men in Ireland - simply because they were Catholic. In one night alone, in 1527 over 8,000 Catholics were slaughtered by Protestants in Rome. Is this acceptable to you? If you had said both sides were evil, I would have agreed with you.
@@candyclews4047 No, what i am saying is Anyone who puts another on the rack or setences them to be burned alive does not deserve any form of respect, i'm not on any particular side per-say, i just have my own morals & common sense & don't take them from the same book as most people seem to on these comments here. He was a murderer, if you want to glorify him like the rest of the sheep on here then Shame on you too!
Dr. Jordan Peterson. Like Sir Thomas, a man of conscience who uncompromisingly stands by politically-incorrect Truth -- and is persecuted for it. Some things don't change.
His courage and bravery is something we should all wish to attain when it comes to our death. All the apostles, sir Thomas and Bishop fisher, I could only hope and pray I could be that strong in my faith.
What "truth"? And what "justice" did accord ro himself and not others? All historical figures are arseholes. To respect him is to belive that ethics don't change (and hopefully advance) and to believe that saying so gives tiu a gravitas you axiomatically wish to construct. What shear bunkum. Grow up. And gain just a modicum of education.
@@vebesese5632 the church is the pillar and foundation of truth and justice based on natural law... Both refer to and are the basis of the Catholic church.
I love Thomas More. He was a truly inspirational man. If only there were more courageous and moral men and woman like him in the Senate and in Congress. America and our whole world would be a much better place.
You need to read some history books before making such a comment , more was not the saint he tried to portray, he conspired behind the king claiming silence when in truth he did nothing but write pamphlets and books condemning what the king was doing . The Catholic church at that time was in everyone's pockets and controlled counties as puppets , Henry broke with that , not with God but against the pope the whole of Europe was fighting the pipe at this time , it was not a new concept.
Tulsi Gabbard is just that kind of person! And look what they did to her! In the debate? She Put every one of them in their place! Event knocking out the actual vice president Kamala Harris! Politics = a big soap opera with very shady actor playing a role!
@@jennywc I am a bit of a history nerd, so yes I have "read my history ". All of it, not just the parts written by Catholics. Saying that More just questioned them but left the actual torturing and burning to his underlings is equivalent to arguing that it wasn't HItlers fault that all those Jews died. This article would be a good start for you. spartacus-educational.com/spartacus-blogURL49.htm It's more of a summary, presents both views and has references to the biographers works. Eg The Statesman and the Fanatic by Jasper Ridley. So I repeat the question. In today's modern world, already divided by religion fundamentalism, why would we want another religious fanatic who would have people murdered simply because they worshipped their God differently from him ?
@@jennywc He didn't execute them no, people lower down the chain did that, but he played his part in it. I mean if you consider someone a good man who sent people to be burned alive for reading a bible in their own native tongue then more fool you. It's about bloody time you religious fanatics woke up to reality the rest of us seem to be in. Go read a science book, please.
@@manbearpig7359 I don't get it. When did St Thomas Moore murder people? Also, you are mistaken if you think we are divided by religious fundamentalism. We are living in the least religious times in the history of mankind. We are also living in the most secular time. We are more divided by political disagreements than religion or religious fundamentalism.
Sir Thomas Moore cannot hear you nor pray for you because God's Word says so. God also says we who believe in His Son our Beloved Saviour Lord Jesus Christ that we are ALL saints. In Paul's 2nd letter to the people of Corinth, chapter 5, verse 8, the Holy Spirit had Paul write: Absent from the body, present with the Lord. Once we are dead and in Christ's presence - that is IT. There is NO mediator, God says in His Word, for man on earth but the Man Jesus Christ - the Son of the Living God - our Redeeming Lord, Yeshua Ha Mashiach. So pray to God our Father in Jesus's Name, as Jesus taught His disciples. To do otherwise is blaspheming the Name and existence of God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit. PERIOD.
You know, you don't need him to pray for you, God will hear your prayers if you ask him. He is your Father in Heaven and He loves you. Make sure you do this in the name of Jesus Christ.
Great mini-documentary! And on a great man. :) I can't say I agree with many of the practices of the Catholic Church myself, I'm more of a nondenominational Christian, but I do admire Sir Thomas More for standing on his principles, and he's called "A Man For All Seasons" because he was constant, consistent, in his beliefs, stuck with them until the bitter end. He was not afraid of anyone who thought differently of him, and he always did what he believed was right. It's no wonder to me why the Catholic Church has deemed him a saint, he does deserve some kind of high recognition for such virtue. :) I think for the sake of religious freedom, there needed to be something along the lines of a Church of England, but in the way it was formed, according to what I see here, it was a terrible way to do it. More was persecuted for not buying into the corruptions of what he saw King Henry bringing into the church. And honestly, I can't blame him, because the real reason Henry created the Church of England in the first place was just so he could justify his divorce from Catherine and marry his mistress Anne, from how I see it. If I were More, I'd be pretty turned off by the new church, too, just for that reason. I hope I meet Sir Thomas More in Heaven one day, and until that day comes, I want to be someone who's a lot like him, who knows how to be confident in his principles and not being afraid to say and do what's right. :)
@@suzycreamcheesez4371 Hey Suzy, thank you for defending me here. For the record, I don't mind anyone who is Catholic, I'm friends with a few Catholics and I think they're great Christians, but all I wanted to do here was peacefully state my opinion on Sir Thomas More. Also, I'm a woman. LOL
Complex my arse, he was as inflexible as he was incorruptible. Considering the lack of moral fibre in the English court no wonder he stood out. The Cato of his time.
Sometimes what looks like the most simple can be the most complex: A simple act of 'not following others' might give rise to volumes of fundamental questions about self, society, ethics, ideas etc.
Utopia is in many ways an ideal society - except for two issues: 1. although he allows for freedom of religion in some respects, he was unable to see that true freedom must include the freedom not to worship or believe, and 2. He was unable to imagine a world without slaves. Still, for the time, it was a remarkable vision.
honeychurchgipsy6 I think if you read Utopia, no land, as an ideal society you are reading it wrong. It is a nation with no property, no family that wages endless war with it's neighbors to build a slave empire. To me Utopia sounds more like a stalinist nighmare than a utopia. The man relating the story of Utopia is named Hythloday, literally meaning peddler of nonsense in Greek, and More ends the story with a character named Thomas More explaining why Utopia is entirely unrealistic.
I'm very proud that in my paternal line (father's,father's,father,etc,etc) it ends with St. Thomas More and his father through Thomas More's son John More and his wife Anne Cresacre (whom Sir Thomas More was actually the guardian of interestingly enough). A lot of the same views survive in the family thankfully. Even a few of us can speak Latin still.
Elizabeth F., in wanting to reverse the dispensation, didn't Henry VIII, also, say that his marriage to Catherine of Aragon hadn't been "consummated "? He tried to make Princess Mary a "non-person" because she wasn't male.🤔🤔🤔✌✌✌✌
An incredible Saint🙏 His life has so much to teach us for these crazy times when aggressive atheism seeks to enslave people by Godless authority🙏 So many people are going to face such choices in the times ahead- history keeps repeating itself 🙏
@@manbearpig7359 On the first two, Nuremberg Code i.e. having to do with consent to experimentation, and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is "a fundamental constitutive document of the United Nations and, by extension, all 193 parties of the UN Charter." The nature of "informed consent" has been clarified in case law in various countries, e.g. in Canada three relevant cases which went to the Supreme Court are referenced. To clarify, I'm talking about laws compelling people to be vaxed against their will. So yes, this s*** is illegal/against the law and unlawful/not authorized by law. As far as whether it's moral, it's fashionable to question the existence of morality. But if we take the Buddhist notion of moral action being that which leads to long-term benefit for self and other, then the arbiter's work is easier. Using that definition to compare public health responses and public health outcomes in various countries (e.g. Japan, Sweden), we get a picture of cost/benefit ratios which says, yes the response has been largely immoral.
@@manbearpig7359 he didn't do that. He was the Chancellor ffs. Imagine the same accusation being leveled at the Chancellor today? Same difference. So I'm calling you out on your BS.
The trial scene is one of the great ones in cinema history. And More was, without doubt, a great man of his time. Yet we mustn't forget (and it is particularly regrettable since he was such a remarkable man), that he authorized the hunting down and brutal execution of those who were involved in the dissemination of the Holy Bible in English, that the common people might be able to read it and evaluate it for themselves. Richard Baysfield, who was executed for distributing Tyndale's English language Bible, was described by More as having been, 'well and worthely burned'. Whoever we are are, whether we are of Roman Catholic faith, Protestant, Muslim, or, say, no faith, we must unequivocally condemn the killing of people for their conscience.
Without giving you the well worn rebuttal to your comments about More, and the fact that the bible in English was first commissioned by the Catholic church ( which you erroneously call the "Roman" Catholic church)... Please confirm the literacy rates of these common people of the time who so eagerly thirsted to read Tyndale's rendition? I'l save you the bother. Less then 30%. Gauged on how many could sign their names. Mostly males. Significantly less women. Therefore, the vast majority of common people didn't crave the bible in English, even given that the scriptures had been translated already and even further assuming that English was widely spoken.
A travesty of justice, the classic kangaroo court. Thomas was a man of intellect, ethics and morals. This injustice demonstrates Henry’s venal ego - he was a monster and did not deserve Thomas’ support or friendship.
Yeah also mention how Sir Thomos had people burned alive for hersey or speaking out against the church. He was no different then other men of power, if you disagreed with his beliefs he had you kill just like Henry or other powerful men
Sir Thomas moore was a devout Roman Catholic his Catholic faith and his heart ♥ wouldn't let him renounce catholicism and the Pope as head of the church Thomas more was a true Englishman born in London and loyal to the king 👑 he died the King's good servant but God's first sir Thomas moore died for his faith in Christ's universal holy Catholic Church and truly believed in his heart that the Pope was the vicar of Christ head of the English church Thomas moore was a saint who died for his faith for Christ and his universal holy Catholic Church
Powerranger6342 Wrong.He was Lord Chancellor,he personally tortured men and women because of their faith.It wasn't Henry who turned the rack handle,it was More.
Come on Snaggle. What makes you think they play a harp in the first place ? You watch too many cartoons. They sing acapella, and I'll bet pretty well at that. And I'm pretty sure iit come supernaturally. Now grab a popsicle or something.
I am here as I just found out Sir Thomas is my 15x great grandfather thru Anne Irene More his great granddaughter born 1553. I knew who he was as soon as I saw his name with the title Lord High Chancellor of England. Great man even though I am Protestant...lol
i think that there was an error at approx 16:07 where the text states that the Magna Carta Was "signed" by King John in 1215. I believe that was an error, my understanding was that King John couldn't write, and he affixed his seal to the document. (Someone, please correct me if I am wrong)
I think he was pompous and violent. When it came to those who did'nt believe as he did. He was reponsible for torturing and burning people alive. Not sure why folks think he was all that.
The thing that I struggle with is that Islam came with a superior way to govern way before all of this , To quote on this particular matter , Ziyyad ibn Abihi ( governer of busra - Iraq ) at Ommayad caliphate said : “ Hatred towards myself I do not punish, but only crime. “ And bigger character in Islam Omar bin Al khattab the second caliphate , once in office so to speak met a guy and confessed that he despised him to his face , the man simply replied “ it’s women that cry over such pitty things “ and Omar didn’t hold grudge against him or misused his power towards him . Nor he did towards any other , Omar is a beacon for justice . They all were taught in the school of the prophet peace and blessings be upon him Whom he himself when once in battle ordering men to straighten the line , One man wouldn’t listen so the prophet would straighten him with a stick , the man told the prophet that ( you injured me ) So at that time before battle , the prophet , supreme leader , would show his stomach and say ( hit me back as I hit you ) . The prophet raised free men , Even I would argue Islam called earlier than all to free slaves by actions and deeds , dignified them , and good treatment of women .
idk but he may be a 14th great grandfather of mine tracing back from my 4th great grandfather judge samuel dalton john moore or his uncle gabriel moore can anyone help me find out if this infact is true? trace from sdj moore or gabriel moore there is a samuel moore of virginia who either was from ireland or in possibly thomas more's line a samuel from reading berkshire england
Leo played #2 in The Prisoner and Moore's issue is obviously Central to #6 right to be a free man. My life is my own. I resigned, it is a matter of conscience.
He very well may have ordered such terrible deeds but one would need more reliable reporters than the charlatans that cosied up to Henry VIII after his break with More. There was a Bloody Henry, a Bloody Mary and a Bloody Elizabeth but Anglo-Tudor history records only a "Bloody Mary". You will forgive us here in Ireland if we take a slightly jaundiced view.
Sir Thomas Moore stood for many good things, was learned, articulate and perhaps a visionary. however ... No one in the comments seemed to have remembered he was also a heretic hunter, relishing in the persecution of those who dared to believe differently. he is a Saint with blood on his hands and people appeared to have simply eliminated that very pertinent aspect of his life. Moore is canonized for dying a Catholic martyr, but he participated in the persecution and ultimately murder of heretics. The state burned them, but Moore was a zealot happy to entrap, torture and pass them on to an inevitable and agonizing death. Sure, Moore died for his beliefs, but he also was instrumental in killing others for theirs. In order to understand the man, we must know the man, and looking at the comments here, one would believe he had never done anything wrong. The Catholic church has made a sinner, a saint. It appears that having the blood of heretics on one's hands is acceptable and one wonders where Moore's much vaunted "Humanist" leanings were when he watched those who didn't share his beliefs burn.
“...an act of parliament which is directly repugnant to the law of god and his holy church, the supreme government of which no temporal person may, by any law, presume to take upon him.” A statement made sincerely and with conviction. I admire Sir Thomas for his courage in choosing death over compromising his principles. However, I strongly disagree with this quote as it is a statement against the separation of church and state. The state law that convicted him was certainly unjust but not because it went against god’s law. In reality, no one knows a thing about so-called god’s law and those who think they do have no rightful power of enforcement over anyone but themselves.
I truly have no idea why Alison Weir was in this documentary. She is not a historian and virulently anti-Catholic. She has a very odd obsession with the blood thirsty Tudor dynasty.
@@jamesparson who are Roger and Demi? my moore line on my mom's side is not thomas more I traced it back not too long ago but it is england, moore place benenden or someting kent england
Yes, but the oath and MC says the English Church, not the Roman Church. An Engineers view, yes I am Anglian and sadden by the liberalizing of the Church lately. It is degrading.
Rich Ryan have you seen that Bishop in sweden who wants Christian iconography taken down in the churches and parts of the church used as a mosque, with directions towards mecca. I'm Irish and even though I don't consider myself Catholic I concur with what you're saying. Where's the Templars when you need them.
are you serious? you cant read that by your eyes of this time..it was written 800 years ago, in those days there was only one Church..it wasnt called roman because there wasnt need to do so since it is THE ONLY Church...after all those reformations people started to call it roman
Was ever there such a tortured soul as St. Thomas More? As Lord Chancellor, 1529 to 1532, he oversaw the burning of "heretics" in England. These were people who, in conscience, could not accept the unquestioned authority of Rome over faith. More oversaw the persecution of people who believed in Christ because he wanted to. He knew that in accepting positions of power in the court of Henry VIII he would be required to conduct such persecutions, even unto immolation. But here would be an excellent society to answer the question of "what good did Thomas More achieve in office?" With his death he achieved very little. He refused to stand fast on his faith, declare openly for Rome, deny Henry his claim of spiritual preeminence, and suffer the consequences. At the last, his convictions were insufficient to give him the strength of character that sustained many Lollards/Anabaptists through torture to their death by burning. The rather ironic bit of history seems to be More's Utopia. His main claim to fame is a tract so close to the social ideals of the Anabaptists that I marvel that More was not seized by the Ecclesiastical courts, charged with heresy, and burnt alive.
he also knew that by accepting the positin he could reduce nubmer of killed by henry..he wasnt killing anybody, King did! and he was lawyer,he must obey law and serve to King
He was quite the opposite character to that which you portray. He stayed loyal to the one true church which is is both founded by and is the body of, Jesus Christ
Six during his chancellorship. It was a different time of religious upheaval which culminated in disasters like the peasants revolt on the continent. It was greatly feared something similar would happen in England, hence the harsh punishment for heresy
More still presents the problem of persecuting Protestants. He had 8 burned at the stake and imposed harsh punishments on those who would distribute the Bible. I find, although he piously resisted denouncing his church, he lacks humility and kindness. A Saint? Really?
If you think of it in the context of the times its not extreme at all, religion and subsequently heresy were taken deathly serious. And given how the tables turned rapidly in the following decades and Catholics became the persecuted, you could easily say (once again in the context of the times) that those measures taken weren't enough. Looking at heresy from the perspective of a 16th c. devout Catholic, executing a handful of heretics to prevent the loss of innumerable souls to said heresy was easily justifiable.
Yes, punishment was brutal in the 16th century. But I wonder if the ordinary man didn’t view it as repugnant. I would have to study More more carefully to say he wasn’t culpable. I have never thought of him as a “Man for All Seasons.” Being a Protestant, I am unfamiliar with much of Catholic Church doctrine. Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I appreciate it very much. So much to learn.
He ensured the extremely painful execution of others for religious consciousness (as simple as owning a bible in the 'incorrect' language) and was himself eventually executed for his religious feelings. The king spared him a painful death though.
I believe the King was privately ashamed. He respected More's sound judgement and moral virtue which he could not himself emulate. The rest is history.
Henry VIII led a nation, persecuted Catholics, his bastard daughter who was queen sowed terror among Catholics, in short, he placed the soul of his Catholic kingdom in the hands of Satan by embracing Protestant heresy because of a love affair with Ann Boleyn, who ended up being beheaded after bringing spiritual disorder to a magnificent kingdom that gave great souls to the Western world. Sir Thomas More a great saint who understood the devil's game to take a promising and blessed kingdom out of the hands of the holy Catholic Church. Saint Thomas More, pray for the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons, steeped in Protestant heresy to the ends of the earth!
Let’s not forget about the countless people who were burned alive at the stake in his name. I admire his resilience in the face of such a test against his conscious, whilst knowing that his life is ultimately the price he would pay. I’m not sure whether I can honestly say that I would have been as resolute, but it is worth noting that most people are not anywhere near as pious or righteous in their beliefs of either religion, or the monarchy. Although, I am not inclined to view him as an “English hero”
nevermind it may be a john moore from reading berkshire england my 10th great grandfather?? www.wikitree.com/wiki/Moore-2884 the 5th great grandfather? of edward william kulm lee? moore the 6th great grandfather? of judge samuel dalton john moore
Matthew 16:17-19 “16:17 And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”
here is a better link for john samuel moore ancestors.familysearch.org/en/LB9N-LCG/captain-john-samuel-moore-1584-1676 yes right it is not just john moore or just samuel moore but a john samuel moore
Uh, don't want to put a spanner in the love-in of TM here, but what about all the bad press? What about all the torture he was (reputed) to be more than happy to take part in, what about they way he (reputedly) treated his family? And before the reputeds are picked upon, remember, historical reports are interpreted, largely dependent on personal agenda.
I liked this documentary ! But I wouldn’t mind seeing one that shines some light on those rumors(and fact I know of the torture but nothing about his family life)
If Thomas More was President of USA now he’d have anyone that didn’t abide by the Catholic religion burnt at the stake for heresy. He was not the saintly character depicted in the film, but he was a man of his times. Brilliant film nonetheless !
Christ did not give Peter that title......all he said was that upon this rock you will build my church. Now where in that simple sentence do you get that Jesus named Peter as Pope. The Catholic Church was way to powerful back then, they told Kings whom they shall marry and who to go to war with. Things they had no business with. They lied to the people from the start, when they decided what books should go into the Bible, and they had phrases here and there changed to suit what they wanted the people to know about Jesus and about God. Everything making them the only ones who could get a person into heaven. I use to be Catholic until I realized that how they were even today defying God's laws.
