Dec 29 Thomas Becket

Thommy and John

Good morning
I love you

‘tis 12/29/7 1848, just a while before the giants/patriots game – if Coughlin loses anyone to injuries tonight he oughtta be shot…. The pats’ 16-0 is irrelevant [unless it’s nineteen and oh].

The week between Christmas and new years has some of our biggest and a few of our favoritest saints…. Stephen, Holy Innocents, John the Apostle, and, today, Thomas Becket….


St. Thomas Becket b. 12/11/1118 d. 12/29/1170 c. 2/21/1173

Thomas Becket’s parents came to England from Normandy. [was he raised in a bilingual home?] And there’s no small bit of quibbling about their lineage – to the degree that many write ups explicitly deny his mother was a Saracen. But he was born to parents of modest means, not peasants but not more than a few rungs above…. My grandparents came to the USA from Ireland. Turn of the century Irish immigrants were not coming with a pot of gold; hardly a pot to piss in, actually. My parents received a not atypical 1920s thru depression upbringing in the upper east side [not the upper east side I came to play in during my stint at staten island mental health center in 1976-7!]. they got a high school education – no small thing for their generation and station in life. As my father said at many a meal, ‘we do alright in this country; a roof over our heads, three squares on the table….’

Thomas Becket received an excellent education from his earliest years. Sure he was talented. And, yes, his parents expected him to live up to those talents. And, they got him the education, and the opportunities to be with ‘gentlefolk’. I don’t remember the gentlefolk part of my upbringing. I’m a simple irish catholic street kid from nyc. Not a street kid in the sense as my father and uncles who literally did spend more than a night or two being passed around the neighborhood so as not to have to sleep on the street…. But a street king of kid. No polish. No panache. But definitely an education. The expectation, consistently reinforced, with the belt always available if all else failed, was that I would get As, I would study and do well in school, anything else was secondary, if on the list at all. I pretty much delivered the As; and got to do some of the other stuff – altar boy, choir, basketball, little league, patrol, …. Other stuff….

Thomas Becket started at Merton Abbey and then studied in Paris – the hub, the pinnacle of education in the known western world. How he worked his way through school or how he got sponsored, I’m sure we have more details but they didn’t pop up in the sources I drew this dribbling from. … I went to st Patrick, Roosevelt, sacred heart, Longfellow, Lincoln [from whence I wanted to go to a junior seminary but our parish priest redirected me], Cheverus, molloy, and then on to the Jesuit novitiate, Shadowbrook, in Lenox, MA. Whew! And then on to the University of Alabama. My parents, of course , paid my way through high school – no small expense for them, I am sure, and was, more surely, not appreciative at the time. the Jesuits’ benefactors paid for us at the novitiate. For Alabama I worked as a wire lather in the summer of 1969. it cost less as an out of state student at Alabama than for me to have gone to stoneybrook. I also borrowed no small amount of money. No one subsidized my education expenses. Lots of baloney sandwiches – not so bad really; and mike spanos’ exquisite meat sauce!

With his education under his belt, he found secretarial work – in the 12th c. private secretary of the rich and famous genre. In 1411 he was secretary to the Archbishop of Canterbury! [Again the details are variously reported; though fascinating, who knows how he really got to that position of trust and influence?]

Thomas Becket rose up within the Archbishop’s staff not only by his intelligence and knowledge, but also his winning and loveable ways, his frankness that was tempered by how well he understood/discerned the people with whom he represented the Archbishop’s interests. Thomas Becket is described [catholic ency.] “slim of growth and pale of hue, with dark hair, a long nose, and a straightly featured face. Blithe of countenance.” …. I went into the novitiate at about 225# but came out at 165 and able to almost enjoy a mile or two fast jog; good stamina at tennis [though it took lessons to make me a 3, and sometimes, rarely, competitive at 3.5] I got my degree, and much of the Alabama level of learning that went with it. [e.g., I read more, remember more of what I read too, in one quarter at UOregon grad school than in four years at UA Psych. Grad. School.]

The Archbishop sent Beckett to study civil and canon law at Bologna and Auxerre. … I spent a semester at the UOregon when my dissertation chairman took his sabbatical there – paid my own way, he got with Gerald Patterson, I had Steve Johnson plus two classes to take – and learned about beer nuts and pounders, music at the bars every night of the week, was introduced to the condom, spent a night in jail, and, oh by the way, finished my dissertation, taught, and helped with Steve’s research.

Upon his return, 1154, Thomas Becket was ordained deacon – and the Archbishop gave him several preferments, including the Archdeaconry of Canterbury. Right at the time that Henry II became king. [I remember to put Becket with II and More with VIII because B before M and II before VIII.] “Thomas of London” – you don’t get to be Archdeacon to the Archbishop of Canterbury by being a wallflower and inconsequential. Thomas Becket was playing in the big leagues and was on the all star team.

King Henry II tapped the 36 y.o. Thomas Becket to be his chancellor. He was then if not the most powerful person serving the King, only the justicar had bigger influence [jus•ti•ci•ary (er′ē) noun 1. the chief political and judicial officer under the Norman and early Plantagenet kings 2. ARCHAIC one who administers justice, as a judge 3. the jurisdiction of a justiciary.]

I was 36 in 1985. That year I joined HCA. From 1977 with my PhD in hand – I did walk across that stage – to 1985 I did not have an Archbishop as guardian angel and mentor. In part because I continued to not stay in one place long enough. E.g., what if I’d stayed at BAMA with the PhD? I’d be the world’s expert on the reinforcement effectiveness of social interactions with preschoolers, especially negative interactions. Who’d know where my dissertation and Paul Weisberg and Paul Siegel would have taken me? Imagine my being chairman there today instead of Bob Lyman? Not likely but it’s a thought!. Mal nor Steve were mentor material for me – I’m irish catholic dancing along the edge, they, very not irish catholic and building their castle behind giant walls within a moat. Ed Smith or Barry Mason mighta coulda become mentors for me if I’d stayed in touch or stayed near Tuscaloosa for a while. Dr Ernst would have been a rain maker for me if I’d stayed at UAB – see me as associate Director or CEO at UAB? [during my time at UAB I knew the two Birmingham contestants for white house fellow. When david matthews was selected sec of hew, the president really meant the president of UAB not the UA president. So, who knows, if I’d gotten into the academic administration ranks from UAB…  ] but, alas, I jumped into the private psych industry and in 1985, at 36, landed with HCA. Not quite chancellor of England. But the HCA route took me to a seat at the table in JCAHO, NAPHS, and AHA, at least within my behavioral health field. Imagine if I’d stayed at HCA. I’d have had VU mentors as well as HCA execs…. Oh well…. 1985 was a good year…. 36 a great breakthrough for Thomas Becket.

Thomas Becket, about 12 years older than his king, was of one mind, one heart with his sovereign. As much as they hunted or marched together or as much as they worked for the kingdom together, they saw eye to eye, heart to heart, what was best for England, for the Kingdom. They both also love to live in extravagance. When Thomas Becket went to France to negotiate a marriage, he had such a retinue that the French figured that if the chancellor traveled in such splendor, what must it be like to be in the court of the King.!?

1159. Thomas Becket organized the king’s expedition to Toulouse. As was the practice of the times, a man could buy himself out of having to join the army. Thomas Becket enforced this requirement even on the ecclesiastics who were not about to join the army. [they didn’t have Canada to go to at that time.] Therefore, this was the equivalent of a heavy tax [fine?[ on the Church! Dum dee um dum!

Thomas Becket himself rode at the head of his army and is described as a powerful fighter against the French. Remember, Thomas Becket was the Archdeacon of Canterbury, still, too. Imagine our bishops also leading their own mercenaries into daring attacks in Iraq? Thomas Becket, loyal servant and powerful fighter for the king. Maybe not saintly credentials. But, in the absence of other warlord traits of his era, we get a glimpse of his core of holiness…. He was not licentious [the ole rape and pillage thing; the wild and crazy things conquering heroes get to do with the fair damsels. Personally, Thomas Becket despised foul conduct/speech, lying, and unchastity [Word does not think this is a word.].

Life was hunky dory for England, Henry, and Thomas, all together, fundamentally simpatico. As Archdeacon and Chancellor, Thomas Becket led and represented the two pillars, the woven fabric of life in twelfth century England. He also was well trained in civil and canon law with an acute sense of principles or each one’s prerogatives and privileges. E.g., Thomas Becket he opposed Henry’s dispensation. He opposed a marriage the King supported but was of questionable validity within the Church. Thomas Becket pursued his king’s interests to the fullest… up to but not on or over the line established by his conscience and his responsibility to the Church.

In 1161, the Archbishop died. It was the common practice of the times for the monarch to tell the Pope whom to appoint to the bishoprics. Henry saw this opportunity to put his man into the Primacy, to better milk the wealth and powers of the Church for the monarchy. And Thomas Becket, no fool and knowing the ambitions of the King vis a vis the Church wanted no part of the coming conflicts. Thomas Becket went to the king and told him that he would perforce oppose such shenanigans. The King and the Pope’s legate persuaded Thomas Becket that the Archbishop duties were his religious obligation.

Archbishop Thomas Becket: 1162.
And with this mantle, Thomas Becket, formerly Thomas of London!, became a new man. Up to now, he kept his religiosity to himself. Thomas Becket saw what was coming and he decided to immerse himself into his role and religious practices in a more public way – so it would be clear to all who saw, most hopefully, the king: fasting, discipline, hair shirt, vigils, prayer… he ended all signs of his former lavish life… he went barefoot to receive the pallium from Rome. And, against the King’s wishes, Thomas Becket resigned the Chancellorship.
I recommend Juggling Elephants. An easy read. Circus metaphor for prioritizing and balancing the three rings in our circus life: relationships, work, and self. By the time I’d reached May 1, 1982 [33 y.o.] my personal or public experience of my religiosity waxed and waned several times. By my junior year in high school I was focused on joining the Jesuits – and led the fastest rosary at Molloy. At the novitiate, with novices ranging in age from 18 to 30something and Jesuits from young rising stars to half dozen retirees living in our infirmary, we had inspiration and multiple variations on the Ignatian theme. The first two years were, it seems [since I only did the first two years], meant to learn fundamental Ignatian and then create a personal foundation in Jesuit spirituality and modus vivandi. At BAMA, being a Catholic, a very tiny minority, the Newman Center was an Island of Catholic expression [at BAMA that Center was still pre-Trent via it’s 70something chaplain’s view of the world] in which I became something of a student leader. The summer after Woodstock I came back and the altar rail was still there [with plastic ivy still entwined] and the altar still faced the wall. I walked out on Church, God, myself for a while – until I found a Jesuit in Birmingham, joined that small community until I rejoined the Newman group. Graduate school was wild and crazy – Catholic on Sunday [plus the seasons and holy days], Catholic by identity, and still wild and crazy. Back in NY I did not find a parish to settle in, more of an itinerant Catholic or as Cardinal Weakland wrote, a behind the pillar kind of Catholic. When I returned to Tuscaloosa for the MBA I found a different, a vibrant Newman Center [I do belong at a university for my best modus vivandi.] and each time between 1969 and 1982 that I thought about or talked about marriage, I immersed into Catholicism, well, each time but the last, when we just dipped into it and I trusted but didn’t verify…. We each have a responsibility to fast, exert self discipline, do penance, engage God in prayer and choose those jobs that are consistent with our pursuit of salvation….

When Thomas Becket resigned the chancellorship, Henry II seemed to focus his efforts to exert more control of the Church as well as extract from it more wealth and power – the focus was his personalization of these efforts against Thomas Becket: a visible and symbolic as well as personal effort. E.g., the King told Thomas Becket to give up his archdeacon preferment. Thomas Becket delayed obeying the King. [imagine the dynamics here. The king is telling the archbishop how to do church business. Not to mention Henry’s telling Thomas to give up mucho dinnero. And, this was at a time when it was common for monarchs to have a say, the say, in who held what church positions….]

Thomas Becket thought he’d had the king’s backing to reclaim estates that formerly belonged to the Archdiocese. Well, Henry II didn’t like Thomas Becket’s reaching into his realm of benefices.

Henry II needed more money for his treasury – it costs to run an expansive as well as high living monarchy. He directed the parishes to make a voluntary donation to the sheriffs to help the king’s coffers. Thomas Becket publicly resisted and persuaded the King to withdraw his demand. But now their relationship was perilously strained – personal and church v. state.

The King’s officials, in a not unnatural evolution of civil law and secular authority began to assert jurisdiction over clerics who violated the law. The history was that the Church took care of its own – and dutifully meted out penalties. Thomas Becket as Archbishop, as he held as Chancellor, as he held firmly as a personal conviction, maintained the principle that the government did not have jurisdiction over clerics. This became acrimonious between Church and State, personally so from King v. Archbishop to pastor v. sheriff.

On October 1, 1163 [so nice to have precise dates 844 years later  ], Thomas Becket called the bishops together to pre-empt the King’s making this effort into written law. Most of the bishops did not see the threat as gravely as Thomas Becket did; they saw themselves as having the authority to cull out criminal clerics to mete out punishments themselves. Thomas Becket held firm [inflexible?  how do we decipher the difference between righteous firmness and maladaptive inflexibility?].

The King retaliated by insisting that the Archbishop give up certain castles that he held as benefices of the archdiocese. By now, word had reached the Pope. [imagine the intensity of this mounting struggle. And see how what was happening in England could play itself out throughout Christendom if not the entire Church/State relationships. The Pope took a keen interest.] Thomas Becket acquiesced to the Pope’s urging for compromise by offering the King, in a personal and private way, to obey the King ‘loyally and in good faith.’

This was not enough for the King – the divine right of kings; the King is the Kingdom and all that. January 13, 1164, at Clarendon, Henry II insisted that the Archbishop make a formal and public acceptance of the “Constitutions of Claredon.” – at the heart of which were the aviate consuetudines, the assertion of the King’s authority over clerics who break the law. Thomas Becket and Henry II could not [did not] find an accommodation, this was definitely an either/or for each of them. As much as the bishops sought an accommodating resolution, Thomas Becket held the Church in uncompromising opposition to the King’s assertions. [844 years ago, the crux of the conflict, personified and personalized, played out in London. Where is the line between State and Church? Drawing a venn diagram of the relationship from time immemorial, we might see at first only one circle – when the king was god, when the state was religion; or was that vice versa? The render unto Caesar, render unto God admonition is not so clear in the practical, even today. Not even in the fantasy of our ‘private lives.’ How do we know what to do for God, for Caesar, personally, ourselves? Right up to Mitch Romney’s and Mike Huckabee’s pursuit of the presidency within the context of their faith and religion. Not unlike, if I may stretch a metaphor, when Bob Begtrup asked me, ‘who’s responsible for Dietary, the Medical Director or the CEO?’ I answered “Yes.” That question changed the entire tone of his interviewing me – we lost the command school officer and began to engage one another about how would we lead VCAPH. I explained, there is no decision that the doctors make, that the medical director would make in his purview that would not effect the areas of responsibility of the CEO – and vice versa. So, yes, the medical director and the ceo were responsible for dietary, together.]

The King unleashed the rule of law against Thomas Becket, finding the opposing Archbishop, a renowned civil as well as canon lawyer, in contempt of court; and then revisiting his duties as Chancellor [though he had been released from any claims against him when he resigned] the courts found him to now personally owe 30,000 pounds. [yes, when you stand for right in the face of the more powerful authority, that authority will likely use its powers to force you to act in the authority’s best interest, not yours or God’s or your family’s or the Church’s. We encounter this from our friends, when they want to do something that is outside our acceptable boundaries and we say no thank you. The ‘social pressure’ – personal disapproval, a withdrawal of kindness or friendship or love is laid on us to get us to go along. And when we face a similar conflict with people in authority, people who hold sway over our lives, we must be prepared to play out the string – not to avoid conflict, not to acquiesce to greater power but to do what is right, to align ourselves with God and Church and all others after that [with family as domestic church, nested within God and Church]. As the struggle between Henry II and Thomas Becket demonstrates, to be right, to do right, for self and faith and church elicits austricization from friends and colleagues [for Thomas Becket that included his bishops and his friend the king], even exile, literally getting thrown out of the house….]

Henry II called the bishops together and demanded a sentence against Thomas Becket. After confronting the King, Thomas Becket fled on 10/13/1164 to France where Louis VII welcomed him. Pope Alexander III was at Sens and Thomas Becket went to him on 11/23. The Pope had already brushed off the Episcopal envoys sent by Henry and warmly received Thomas Becket – the Pope knew what was at stake here. The Pope did not accept Thomas Becket’s resignation; he needed this conflict resolved in the Church’s favor and saw Thomas Becket as the best way to get there.

Thomas Becket took up residence in the Cistercian Abbey of Pontigny in Burgundy. Henry II began to confiscate the archbishop’s properties and banish his family. Henry II then threatened to wreak havoc with all the Cistercian’s in England if they continued to keep Thomas in their Abbey. This conflict continued unabated until 1170. It involved the kings of England and France; it involved the Pope; it involved the essence of the relationship of church and state throughout Christendom. Henry II and Thomas Becket, the state and the church would not agree on a resolution to who had authority over criminal clerics – it was truly an either/or; with no win-win options apparent - - - and the best people throughout the west were working on it.

In 1170, Thomas Becket and Henry II agreed to reconcile. The question of the key items of Clarendon were not mentioned. Henry II agreed to be guided by the archbishop’s council to resolve rectifying the confiscation of the archbishop’s properties and perogatives. [Henry II owed some concessions having had his son made archbishop of York while Thomas Becket was in exile.]

In December 1170, Thomas Becket was engaged in some conflict resolution at his castle in Saltwood. On December 20, four knights came from France demanding absolution from the bishops. Why they appeared, had they heard the King say ‘why can’t someone rid me of this bother’, were they riled up against the church for their own reasons, it’s all pretty muddied. Thomas Becket refused them absolution.

The knights left but returned at vespers – “Where is the traitor?!” Thomas Becket replied “Here I am, no traitor, but archbishop and priest of God.” [render unto God the things that are God’s – e.g., your soul, your identity….] The knights tried to drag Thomas Becket out of the church, they were unable – imagine the resistance by this warrior and his people. The knights slew Thomas Becket where he stood.


A tremendous reaction to this murderous deed swelled throughout not only England and France but all of the Church. The devotion to the martyred archbishop spread rapidly – an enormous number of miracles were attributed to the archbishop’s intercession.

On February 21, 1173, Thomas Becket was canonized. A political as well as religious statement by the Pope and Church.

On July 12, 1174, Henry II did public penance.

Personalize this story. Not only because Becket is a Thomas saint but also because this story is metaphorical for your lives too.

I love you
dad