Christianity's top 11 most controversial figures | Thomas Cranmer

Cranmer's 'sexed-up' case for Henry VIII's divorce from Catherine of Aragon provided the cover needed for the monarchy to break from the Holy See.

By Patrick Osgood Published 06 September 2010

Cranmer rose from modest beginnings in rural Nottinghamshire to become a respected advisor to Henry VIII. His divorce dossier, Sufficiently Abundant Collections, made the case that the king had supreme jurisdiction over the church within his territory and so could marry then divorce then kill whom he liked. For his pains he was made Archbishop of Canterbury, a position sewn up for him by the family of decapitee-to-be Anne Boleyn and paid for by his royal patron.

Hurried by news of Anne Boleyn's pregnancy and subsequent secret marriage, Cranmer delivered his legal opinion on 23 May 1533: Catherine of Aragon's marriage to the king was (who's have thunk it) against the law of God. Aragon was out, Boleyn was in, and the Act of Supremacy of 1534 made the whole thing legal.

Cranmer and fellow upstart Thomas Cromwell served as Henry's wheeler-dealers in Protestant Europe, matchmakers, and anullers. Cromwell's recommendation of the plain and stupid Anne of Cleves fell flat: even Henry would not touch her, and this sealed Cromwell's fate. Cranmer's game was up with the ascension of Mary I, who had him burned at the stake for treason. A Nicodemite to the last, Cranmer renounced the reformation strenuously to his accusers he but when it became clear this would not spare him, took it back.

Cranmer wasn't all bad. He was a long admirer of the humanism of Erasmus, which motivated him to make the power of the liturgy intelligible to the masses with English-language services and The Book of Common Prayer. He was the only member of court with the balls to tell Henry Catherine Howard was doing the dirty on him. But mostly he was the clinging, craven legitimator-in-chief of an impossibly randy and capricious tyrant.

Previous: Joan of Arc

Next: Pope Urban VIII

Back to list

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

3 comments

Mon, 2010-09-06 15:57 — greg sheppard (not verified)

This is no accurate representation of Cranmer, it fundamentally misses the point of his aims. He was a radical Protestant (and this became very obvious under Edward) who used Henry to push Protestantismas much as Henry used him (the 6 Articles reverting the church to an almost Catholic state appeared as his and Cromwell's influence wained).
There is also the matter that most of his personal acheivements such as the book of common prayer that providing the basis for the Elizabethan CofE occurred during the reign of Edward not Henry.

Im not religious in anyway (although perversely reformation history interests me) but I still consider Cranmer to be one of the great figures of english history and is undoubtedly very important.

Thu, 2010-09-09 17:28 — Duncan Robinson (not verified)

You're completely right, Tom. Aragon's head was very much attached after her divorce. Apologies.

How could we forget: divorced, beheaded, died, divorced beheaded, survived...

Wed, 2010-09-08 00:09 — Tom (not verified)

Maybe not the biggest deal in the world, but one rather glaring inaccuracy struck me here: "Aragorn's head was off, Boleyn was in, and the Act of Supremacy of 1534 made the whole thing legal."

Catherine of Aragorn's head was never removed in any way. She wasn't put to death. Most scientists seem to believe she died of cancer, a couple of years after Boleyn and Henry were married. (Anne Boleyn was beheaded, of course, and outlived Catherine by all of 5 months)

As an English King, you can behead the daughters of minor Earls and what not. Spanish royalty, whose Nephew is leading a new, growing Spanish empire and isn't crazy about your Protestant reformation already? Not so much.