Michael,
Thanks for the clarification regarding your diary comment. My reading may have been uncharitable, but it initially came across as 'Calvinists invented diaries'.
I just picked up A History of Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years. Is this your MacCulloch reference? Fodder for future discussion I hope. Pretty hefty and if true to the accolades won't be a quick read if I give it proper consideration.
I didn't mean to come across as championing the idea that Tyndale was executed for the language of his translation. As you have pointed out this is trivial considering the widespread translation work going on at the time. Tyndale's heresy was to have been the content of his translation and the impact it had on Church and Clerical authority (Luther's influence???).
I agree with your claim of the hypocrisy and inconsistency of 16th century church/state relations only insofar as it is compared with later liberal thought including the idea of church/state separation. Until I learn more, I don't see anything hypocritical considering events through the lens of the prevailing religious and political philosophy of the time. Saudi Arabia is a modern example. We find fault with executing people for what amounts to religious based thought crime, but people in 16th century England would not have thought it to be out of place.
Thanks for the clarification regarding your diary comment. My reading may have been uncharitable, but it initially came across as 'Calvinists invented diaries'.
I just picked up A History of Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years. Is this your MacCulloch reference? Fodder for future discussion I hope. Pretty hefty and if true to the accolades won't be a quick read if I give it proper consideration.
I didn't mean to come across as championing the idea that Tyndale was executed for the language of his translation. As you have pointed out this is trivial considering the widespread translation work going on at the time. Tyndale's heresy was to have been the content of his translation and the impact it had on Church and Clerical authority (Luther's influence???).
I agree with your claim of the hypocrisy and inconsistency of 16th century church/state relations only insofar as it is compared with later liberal thought including the idea of church/state separation. Until I learn more, I don't see anything hypocritical considering events through the lens of the prevailing religious and political philosophy of the time. Saudi Arabia is a modern example. We find fault with executing people for what amounts to religious based thought crime, but people in 16th century England would not have thought it to be out of place.
