AN ANSWERE VNTO SIR THOMAS MORES DIALOGE

VOLUME 3

AN ANSWERE VNTO SIR THOMAS MORES DIALOGE

The Independent Works

LOCATION

< PreviousNext >

KEY Commentary Side Textual Bibliographic Scriptural

merite or deserue not in heaven / but in this world only / it is to be feared / lest their merites besore wasted and the deseruinges of many al spent thorow oure holy fathers so greate liberaltye.	166/8–19 And when . . . measure. More claimed an OT precedent for celibacy in the temporary continence of Temple priests (cf. CWM 6/1.312/12–17). Lev. 22.4 forbade the sons of Aaron to serve in the tabernacle if they had a skin disease, touched a corpse or had a nocturnal emission. Tyndale answers that the code of ritual purity laid down in Lev. 21–22 makes no mention of marital continence. Further, Zechariah may have been away from his wife during his Temple duty (Luke 1.23), but the reason was simply that their home was not in Jerusalem. (JW)
Abraham and the prophetes / and the appostles and many sens praide to no saintes & yet were holy ynough.
And when he saith / they coude helpe when they were aliue. That was thorow their faith in beleuinge the promise. For they had promises that they shuld doo soch miracles to stablish their doctrine and to prouoke vn to Christ / and not vn to them selues.
And when he proueth that the saintes be in heuen in glorie with Christ all ready sayenge if god be their god they be in heuen / for he is not the god of the deed. There he steleth awaye Christes argument where with he proueth the resurreccion / that Abraham and all saintes shuld rise againe & not that their soules were in heuen which doctrine was not yet in the worlde. And with that doctrine he taketh awaye the resurreccion quite / and maketh Christes argument of none effecte. For when Christe allegeth the scripture that god is Abrahams god / and addeth to / that god is not the god of the deed / but of the liuinge and so proueth that Abraham must rise agayne: I deny christes argument and saye with master More / that Abraham is yet aliue / not because of the resurreccion / but because his soule is in heuen. And in like maner Paules argument vn to the Corrinthians is nought worth. For when he saith / if there be no resurreccion / we be of all wretches the most miserablest. Here we haue no pleasure / but sorow / care / and oppression. And therfore if we rise not agayne / all our soferinge	166/15–16 But . . . prayar. Cf. 1 Cor. 7.5. M. More destroyeth the resurreccion. [1531] Matt. 22.32, Mark 12.27, Luke 20.38: 117/17, 23 the deed] ed., deed 1531, the dead 1573 166/18–19 forboden . . . ministred. Cf. Lev. 10.9. 166/20 christ . . . chastite. Cf. CWM 6/1.312/21–29. Tyndale omits More's clause, "whiche was . . . borne of a vyrgyn" (CWM 6/1.312/22), but he affirms Mary's perpetual virginity although he does not believe that this doctrine is necessary for salvation, cf. 31/14, 95/4–5nn. (JW) 166/21–22 other . . . neyboures. Cf. 1 Cor. 7.5. the god] God 1573 Mat. 22. [1531] DEUTERONOMY: 32.8: 117/28–29 1 CORINTHIANS: 15–13, 19: 117/28–29 166/28–30 Pannutius . . . generall counsel. Socrates Scholasticus reported that Paphnutius, a celibate bishop of Upper Thebes, persuaded members of Nicea I to allow bishops, presbyters, and deacons who were already married to keep their wives; those unmarried at ordination should remain so. Cf. his Ecclesiastical History 1.11 (PG 67.101–4; 2NPNF 2.18). Sozomen added subdeacons to this list. Cf. his parallel Ecclesiastical History 1.23 (PG 67. 925–26; 2NPNF 2.256). Socrates' account is now seen as legendary. Cf. E. Jombart and E. Herman, "Célebat des clercs," Dictionnaire de Droit canonique, 3 (1942) 134, 147f; Georg Denzler, Das Papstum und der Amtszölibat, 2 vols. (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1973–76), 1.9–11. (JW) 1. Cor. 15. [1531] resurreccion] ed., refurreccion 1531, resurrection 1573 most] om. 1573 166/30–31 M. More . . . twise. Tyndale comments on the irony that the English bishops commissioned More, a twice-married layman, to defend the clergy. While More addressed the laity in English , Fisher wrote in Latin, Sacri sacerdotii defensio contra Lutherum of 1525 (Surtz xvii, 329–30). More himself acknowledged, "I am all redy marryed twyse / & therfore neuer can be preste" (CWM 6/1.53/10–12). Tyndale would prefer that each person serve Christ as he can, married or celibate (cf. PS 3.165n2). In the Obedience, Tyndale pursues the complications imposed by canon law on marriage. He criticizes its rules governing marriage among those related by spiritual kindred (L3) and the entrance of a married man into a religious order (D3v, cf. PS 1.171n2). As such decretals complicate marriage, they also muddle pastoral affairs . Since God gave temporal kings the swords necessary to punish all evil-doers equally, the clergy ought to set an example for the laity by subjecting themselves to the king's governance and ought not to desire their sins to go unpunished (Obedience E1, cf. PS 1.178n1). Tyndale also confronts the issues of taxation of the clergy (Obedience E1, cf. PS 1.179n2), the sacraments (Obedience M5), and ordination (Obedience M5). Finally, calling into question popish authority and the body of canon law simultaneously, Tyndale criticizes the papal office for writing its laws to stand above all others (Obedience T4v). (JB)