Becket was an obnoxious fanatic, filled with his own delusions of grandeur, and quite simply in the wrong. The idea that crimes committed by members of the clergy (which included not just priests but anyone associated with the Church, which was just about anyone who could write back then) could be tried only by Church tribunals is a terrible idea and one that I believe in modern times we all agree is a terrible idea. The failure of the Church regarding the pedophilia problem is ample evidence of this fact.
Henry II should have had the balls to openly do what he did indirectly and in a passive-aggressive way. He should have tried Becket, found him guilty, drawn and quartered him and sent the body parts to the four corners of his kingdom.
Had he asserted authority then, and stood on principle, he would have likely gotten more autonomy for the English Church and perhaps staved off the rupture that centuries later created the semblance of a faith known as the Church of England.
ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius
Ummaka qinnassa nīk!
*MySmiley*
