The Unlawful Execution of Thomas Cranmer – 21 March 1556
Posted By Claire on March 21, 2011
The Burning of Thomas Cranmer
On this day in history, 21st March 1556, Archbishop Thomas Cranmer was burnt at the stake in Oxford. His crimes: heresy and treason. You can read the full details of Thomas Cranmer’s life and downfall in my 2 part series - The Life of Archbishop Thomas Cranmer and The Execution of Thomas Cranmer – but here is a brief account of Cranmer’s last days.
Arrest and Imprisonment
Thomas Cranmer was found guilty of treason and condemned to death on the 13th November 1553 and imprisoned in Bocardo Prison, Oxford, with Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley. All three men were tried for heresy on the 12th September 1555 and Ridley and Latimer, who were found guilty at the trial, were burned at the stake on the 16th October 1555 in Oxford. Cranmer, as Archbishop, had to wait for a decision from Rome as to the verdict. In December 1555, Rome sent its decision – he lost his office of archbishop and permission was given for secular authorities to rule on Cranmer’s fate.
In an effort to save himself, Cranmer made four recantation in January and February 1556. In these recantations, he submitted himself to his monarch, Mary I, and recognised the Pope as Head of the Church. However, Edmund Bonner, Bishop of London, was not convinced by Cranmer’s recantation so his priesthood was taken away and it was decided that he would be executed for heresy on the 7th March. A desperate Cranmer then made a fifth recantation in which he stated that he fully accepted Catholic theology and that there was no salvation to be found outside of the Catholic Church. He repudiated his Protestant theology and affirmed that he was returning to the Catholic Church. He took part in the mass and asked for sacramental absolution.
This should have been the end of it. Cranmer had fully recanted, he had done what Mary I wanted and in a very public way. He should have been absolved but although his execution was postponed temporarily Mary I then set a date for it: 21st March 1556. His recantations were for nothing.
Thomas Cranmer’s Execution
On the 21st March 1556, the day of his execution, Thomas Cranmer was told to make a final public recantation at the University Church, Oxford. He stood up, gave the expected prayer and exhortation to obey the King and Queen and then, in a final act of defiance, renounced his previous recantations, saying:-
“And now I come to the great thing which so much troubleth my conscience, more than any thing that ever I did or said in my whole life, and that is the setting abroad of a writing contrary to the truth, which now here I renounce and refuse, as things written with my hand contrary to the truth which I thought in my heart, and written for fear of death, and to save my life, if it might be; and that is, all such bills or papers which I have written or signed with my hand since my degradation, wherein I have written many things untrue. And forasmuch as my hand hath offended, writing contrary to my heart, therefore my hand shall first be punished; for when I come to the fire, it shall first be burned.
And as for the Pope, I refuse him as Christ’s enemy, and antichrist, with all his false doctrine.
And as for the sacrament, I believe as I have taught in my book against the bishop of Winchester, which my book teacheth so true a doctrine of the sacrament, that it shall stand in the last day before the judgment of God, where the papistical doctrines contrary thereto shall be ashamed to show their face.”
It was a shocking turnaround but Cranmer had nothing to lose. He was going to die whatever his actions and beliefs. John Foxe, author of “Actes and Monuments” (“Foxe’s Book of Martyrs”), wrote of Thomas Cranmer’s execution:-
“With thoughts intent upon a far higher object than the empty threats of man, he reached the spot dyed with the blood of Ridley and Latimer. There he knelt for a short time in earnest devotion, and then arose, that he might undress and prepare for the fire. Two friars who had been parties in prevailing upon him to abjure, now endeavoured to draw him off again from the truth, but he was steadfast and immoveable in what he had just professed, and before publicly taught. A chain was provided to bind him to the stake, and after it had tightly encircled him, fire was put to the fuel, and the flames began soon to ascend. Then were the glorious sentiments of the martyr made manifest;—then it was, that stretching out his right hand, he held it unshrinkingly in the fire till it was burnt to a cinder, even before his body was injured, frequently exclaiming, “This unworthy right hand!” Apparently insensible of pain, with a countenance of venerable resignation, and eyes directed to Him for whose cause he suffered, he continued, like St. Stephen, to say, “Lord Jesus receive my spirit!” till the fury of the flames terminated his powers of utterance and existence. He closed a life of high sublunary elevation, of constant uneasiness, and of glorious martyrdom, on March 21, 1556.”
Thomas Cranmer’s execution should never have happened, it was unlawful. Thomas Cranmer had obeyed Mary I and had recanted and repented of his Protestant beliefs. He had accepted the authority of his monarch and the Pope. Whatever he felt inside, he had signed his recantations and submitted to the Queen and Church. Why then was this broken man, a man who had turned his back on his real beliefs and convictions, executed?
Martyrs Memorial, Oxford
Well, I discussed this in my previous article on Thomas Cranmer and listed the following as possible reasons:-
- Revenge – Did Mary I punish Cranmer for ending her parents’ marriage, making her illegitimate and for heralding in the English Reformation?
- An example – Was his brutal end simply a way of showing how far Mary I and the Catholic Church would go to stamp out heresy?
- Politics – Was Thomas Cranmer simply too influential and important a man to let live?
- Theology – Was Mary I simply doing her duty to her God and country by getting rid of an outspoken heretic?
Whatever the reasons for the burning of Thomas Cranmer, he was not forgotten and ended up being remembered as a Protestant Martyr with the likes of Latimer and Ridley. Today, tourists and visitors can see Martyrs’ Memorial and also the cross on the road which marks the site where Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley were burned at the stake. The inscription on the memorial reads:-
“To the Glory of God, and in grateful commemoration of His servants, Thomas Cranmer, Nicholas Ridley, Hugh Latimer, Prelates of the Church of England, who near this spot yielded their bodies to be burned, bearing witness to the sacred truths which they had affirmed and maintained against the errors of the Church of Rome, and rejoicing that to them it was given not only to believe in Christ, but also to suffer for His sake; this monument was erected by public subscription in the year of our Lord God, MDCCCXLI”
Like the apostle, Peter, Cranmer betrayed his faith in fear, but then showed great courage and conviction at the end. RIP Thomas Cranmer.
Notes and Sources
- Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, p236 Chapter on Archbishop Cranmer
- Wikipedia article on the life of Thomas Cranmer
- Wikipedia page on Martyrs’ Memorial, Oxford
I think Cranmer was executed because Mary never forgot that he is the one who declared her mother’s marriage void and this made her a bastard. I think she hated him for it and was happy to have an excuse to execute him in the most horrible way. Burning! I hate to think of it. Mary could be kind but not when it came to anyone who she thought mistreated her mother. Plus, she was such a staunch Catholic she had to get rid of a major archtect of the Anglican Church. I think she had a mean streak!
[Reply]
I, for one, am firmly convinced that Mary I had Cranmer executed out of revenge. If she had wanted to subjugate him, and to have the satisfaction of seeing him cower to her will, she would have accepted his recantations. I think Mary I held an unconscionable grudge, and it led directly to Cranmer’s awful, pitiful execution as a feeble old man.
[Reply]
Since Cranmer was also convicted of treason, he could have been executed horribly (by hanging, drawing and quartering) despite his recantations, since recanting only blocked execution for heresy. While I agree that Mary would have wanted revenge against him for annulling her parents’ marriage, I am not sure if this made a heresy conviction (and a burning) necessary, as opposed to the (legally permissible) execution for treason. Maybe, Cranmer’s status as a founder/architect of the Church of England was the reason why Mary went for heresy?
[Reply]
I think several factors came together to form the reason Thomas Cranmer was executed. First, I do think Mary harbored great anger and resentment against him, although she would not have admitted this to herself. I think she saw him as the implacable enemy of her mother and herself, and I think her animus toward him is the main reason he died. Certainly, she could have stopped the execution at any point, and she did not. I also think he was deeply rested by Bishop Stephen Gardiner, who had suffered in the Tower during the Porotestant years, as well as Archbishop Bonner who was a true fanatic. Finally, he had been the head of the Protestant movement in England and had done much to institutionalize and spread the faith. Thomas Cranmer is a hero of mine, and a geat inspiration. He was not naturally a brave man, and faced with a horrible death, he did recant. But he did the right thing in the end, testified to his true beliefs and very bravely held out his hand to the fire.
[Reply]
The man who supported “the whore,” arranged for the divorce and humiliation of her worhty mother, whom Mary never saw again, as well as the marriage of said whore to her father, who then turned her beloved, loving father into a tyrant, and herself into a bastard – yes, Mary had some baggage.
She was probably also rightly suspicious (in her mind) of Cranmer’s recantations of his Protestant leaning beliefs – threatened with burning at the stake, who wouldn’t recant to save his own neck?
As for the Pope stripping him of the title of Archbishop and giving permission to secular authorities to deal with him, it might have encouraged Mary to act against him – Rome, after all, could not have been too happy with the Protestant schism, which it could be argued that Cranmer argued in favor of, leading so many “astray.”
Finally, the political considerations – Cranmer had become quite powerful and influential, thanks to the Boleyn faction, and there was more than one resentful enemy (Gardiner and Bonner, to name only two) who wanted to take him down. Especially since Cranmer was arguably the most powerful member of the Boleyn faction who was left standing in the wake of Anne’s downfall and execution.
So there was a lot of baggage in Cranmer’s execution, legal or not. There was a lot of baggage in Anne’s execution, and a good many people, even some of Anne’s most implacable enemies, like Chapuys, thought the charges against her were suspicious.
Perhaps Cranmer’s execution was Mary’s way of giving Anne Boleyn one last slap in the face.
[Reply]
People might like to know that every year on the anniversary of the execution, a number of small candles are placed on the cross which marks the site in Broad Street and they are left to burn through the night.
I always found this very touching.
[Reply]
julie b. Reply:
March 23rd, 2011 at 6:43 am
nice.
[Reply]
This is a part of history that is so sad to me. I guess I am too forgiving and do not hold grudges, even against people I know have deliberately hurt me. I leave it up to God to deal with. Religious quarrels which end up in someone being killed just to not make sense to me. This is a part of the Tudor time period that I just can not comprehend and religious quarrels continue to this day. I still do not know why he chose to stay in England. Maybe he overestimated Mary’s ability to forgive.
[Reply]
I personally believe she did it for revenge.
[Reply]
In my opinion Mary was a hateful, bitter person who never forgave anything. She had Crammer executed in revenge for her mother and her life. I think she vowed revenge in the beginning and when she had the opportunity, she acted. Just think what she has to answer to when she stood before God in answer for her life. It is a wonder she did not execute Elizabeth, her half-sister. Too bad England had to put up with her as long as they did.
[Reply]
Mary I was revengful and pathetic…
[Reply]
catharine Reply:
March 30th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
If youd been through what she had been through I am certai you would be the same way.
[Reply]
I am surprised she didn’t kill her sister Elizabeth. Any ideas as to why she didn’t?
Didn’t she have Lady Jane Gray executed?
[Reply]
miladyblue Reply:
March 24th, 2011 at 3:07 am
Elizabeth was way too popular, and executing her would have led to open revolt. Mary’s husband, Phillip II of Spain was canny enough to recognize this, and talked her out of it.
Elizabeth was hailed as “Born mere English among us” at the time she inherited the throne, and perhaps the growing number of Protestants were viewing the persecutions during Mary’s time as Queen as something “foreign” the Spanish talked Mary into. That Spain had the Inquisition probably did not help matters any.
[Reply]
I really have no love lost about Cranmer, and I don’t understand why so many other people do. The man was an obvious opportunist and a turncoat. He’d say anything to anyone and knife any person or institution in the back if by doing so it offered him some advantage. He is not the sole person ever executed under bogus charges, nor is Mary I a gross, vindictive monster if she did opt to murder him. By the standards of the time, Cranmer was a traitor.
[Reply]
I have always thought that Cranmerwas one of the few people with real integrity at the Henrican court. He didn’t seek fame and fortune; he was thrust into the limelight because he had a revoutionary idea about obtaining the king’s divorce and the patronage of the Boleyns maintained him there until he had become indispensible. He was the only person (as far as I know) to speak up for Anne to Henry after she was imprisoned.
When, in Henry’s later years, the king told him that his enemies were gathering against him, he was apparently trusting enough to believe that his innocence would save him. Henry was amazed at his naivety.
Although he recanted, hoping to save his life, who among us can swear that we would not do the same under those circumstances? He was only human.
In any case, I could forgive him much for the Book of Common Prayer, which was very much his work and is full of wonderful prose.
[Reply]
I can’t think of Cranmer as a traitor. He had reformist views in the same way as Anne and George Boleyn had. He put into effect those reforms with the knowledge and support of the King. That is not treason. He was no more a traitor than Anne or George. Once Mary came to the throne his views remained the same, but who can blame him for recanting when faced with a dreadful death? I can see the argument for portraying him as a coward, although I personally don’t believe he was, but I can’t see an argument for calling him a traitor.
[Reply]
I find it astonishing that Anglicans and Roman Catholics seem to get along so terribly well today. We can argue about the death of Cramner and the actions of Mary, but we should always remember that that the Protestant Reformation in England was, and still is, a vitally important reality for the freedom and survival of England and the the Englsih speaking world. We should deeply honor Lattimer, Riddly and Cramner as martyrs who preserved Christ-Centered Anglican and Protestant Freedom amid dark and cruel times. We should all be more aggressively involved in preserving our Protestant heritage. Let us thank Elizabeth I for preserving the Anglican Settlement and let us thank Elizabeth II for preserving the throne for Anglican monarchs.
[Reply]
Don´t really know what´s worse: the death for heresy or the death for treason. Anyhow, he managed to stay alive for a long time, which is a accomplishment when you serve a Tudor.
[Reply]