Should Sir Thomas More Swear To King Henry VIII's Oath

Should Sir Thomas More swear to King Henry VIII’s oath or not? Why, or whynot?

Use 1½ to 2 typed, double-spaced pages to answer one of the following essay questions. Be sure to defend your answer with a careful argument, relying on one or more of the moral traditions examined in class. It is not enough merely to state your opinion, no matter how heartfelt it may be. Do not be overly influenced by the decisions the characters made in the dramas. Instead, make and defend your own decision.

Option C: Should Sir Thomas More swear to King Henry VIII’s oath or not? Why, or whynot?

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The moral dilemma faced by Sir Thomas More in the historical context of King Henry VIII’s breach with the Catholic Church presents a profound question about fidelity, conscience, and justice. The question of whether More should swear to the king’s oath of supremacy encapsulates a conflict between political loyalty and moral integrity. This essay examines the moral implications of More’s decision by analyzing the scenario through the lens of moral tradition, especially focusing on natural law and virtue ethics, to determine whether swearing the oath aligns with moral righteousness or constitutes a betrayal of conscience.

The Context of Sir Thomas More’s Dilemma

Sir Thomas More, a renowned lawyer and statesman, faced the ultimate moral test during Henry VIII’s break from the Catholic Church, which led to the king’s declaration of supremacy over religious matters. The king’s oath required officials like More to acknowledge the monarch as the Supreme Head of the Church of England, thereby rejecting papal authority. More’s refusal to take this oath was rooted in his religious convictions and his allegiance to the Catholic Church’s doctrines. This scenario puts him at odds with the political authority of the king, demanding a moral decision about whether to enforce the oath or remain loyal to his conscience and religious principles.

The Moral Traditions at Play

Natural law tradition emphasizes the importance of moral principles inherent in human nature and accessible through reason. According to this perspective, moral integrity and obedience to divine law take precedence over human authority when conflicts arise. Virtue ethics, derived from Aristotelian thought, accentuates the importance of character and moral virtues such as honesty, integrity, and courage. In More’s case, the virtues of fidelity to one’s conscience and moral truth are critical. The Catholic doctrine also champions the primacy of divine law over human law, suggesting that following divine principles is paramount even at personal risk.

Analysis of the Moral Dilemma

Swearing the oath would align More with the political legitimacy of Henry VIII’s regime and prevent civil conflict. However, doing so would involve betraying his religious convictions and compromising his moral integrity. From the natural law perspective, swearing the oath would contradict the moral order anchored in divine law, which More believed to be unchangeable. Virtue ethics would argue that true moral character requires acting in accordance with one’s conscience, especially when faced with moral injustice or tyranny. Most importantly, More’s refusal underscores the virtue of integrity, demonstrating that moral courage involves standing firmly for what one perceives as moral truth despite adverse consequences.

Conclusion

Considering the moral traditions examined, Sir Thomas More should not swear to King Henry VIII’s oath. Doing so would entail compromising core moral principles rooted in divine law and virtue ethics. More’s decision to remain loyal to his conscience exemplifies moral integrity and courage, virtues essential for upholding justice and truth. While political loyalty might seem practical or expedient, the ethical importance of remaining true to divine and moral law ultimately takes precedence, affirming that individuals must prioritize moral integrity over passive political compliance in the face of tyranny or injustice.

References

• MacCulloch, D. (2011). Thomas Cromwell: A Life. Penguin Books.
• Kelleher, T. (2010). Justice in Moral and Political Philosophy. Routledge.
• Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
• Aristotle. (4th century BCE). Nicomachean Ethics.
• O’Malley, J. W. (1997). The First Jesuits. Harvard University Press.
• Luther, M. (1520). Babylonian Captivity of the Church.
• Burke, E. (1790). Reflections on the Revolution in France.
• Finnis, J. (2011). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Oxford University Press.
• Tuck, R. (1988). Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development. Cambridge University Press.