A History of Anglicanism: Part 2 - Henry VIII - Fedei Defensor

[@rlucero8335]

The problem with Henry VIII and the Church of England is that people focus so much on his marriages instead of what was passed through parliament and also what reforms were done over the course of the Tudor Era in general. Catherine of Aragon was a big part BUT G.R Elton and David Starkey both have account that there is documentation he wanted out in 1511, the reformation was more complicated that Anne Boleyn

[@robertfishman3742]

Rebecca Pembroke Henry’s break with the Catholic Church should be considered in light of his desire and need to establish a more centralized state.

[@dianesicgala4310]

Love Our Lady Walsingham Shrine. Have visited there 4 times.

[@frederickjones532]

You seem to forget that Queen Mary Tudor undid the errors of Henry VIII. Elizabeth I is the true founder of the very Protestant C of E. The Act of Uniformity was carried by a majority of 3 in the House of Lords.

[@x8lover]

Very informative. I hope that every catholic that believes that the anglican church only came to be because Henry wanted a divorce will watch this. They will find that the situation was a lot more complicated.

[@robertfishman3742]

Philip Douglas The English Reformation was a gradual, back and forth process, not being fully concluded until the Elizabethan Settlement was decreed.

[@alhilford2345]

Philip Douglas : So please tell us more. Explain all the complications. The way I understand it is that Henry had no intentions regarding changing the religion, he just decided that he, as King of England, should also be the head of the Church in England, and so passed an Act of Parliament to that effect. Any priest or religious who refused to sign the oath to accept him as head of the Church was executed! Consequently, the best, the holiest, the most dedicated of the clergy and politicians sacrificed their lives rather than sin by denying the Pope, and what you had left were the heretics. This was the foundation which was developed through to the reign of "Good?" Queen Bess.

[@celtusguy]

Our Lady of Walsingham not of Washington!

[@indigenous31617]

Henry was a scoundrel. However, the removal of Papal authority caused Britain to become an expansive empire where the gospel was preached (by different English denominations) for centuries.

[@johnjon1823]

Here's the thing, the Catholic Church in England was never the Church OF England, the Catholic Church is not OF any country, it is the Catholic Church in a country, it is universal, without borders, Catholicism was the religion of England as established by the Catholic Church many years before, once it broke with Rome it was no longer Catholic and it became something else, something different, something that would, for instance grant Henry Viii his sought after "annulment". Mr. VIII's opinion on the matter of his marriage(s) and his "feelings" etc. are irrelevant because Mr. VIII had zero authority over such matters, and in fact, this would be a teaching of the Catholic religion in which he was fully informed. His break with Rome is the genesis of the Anglican Church since it is the thing that made it happen. One can see the destruction of things Catholic in the usurpation and destruction of the entire system to care for the poor in the destruction of the monasteries and the 300 years of hanging, drawing and quartering of Catholic priests. In other words, being a Catholic in this former Catholic country after Mr. VIII was not without grave danger of persecution. One cannot claim the past saints of the Catholic Church who founded Christianity in England as founders or members of the "Church of England" since that group persecuted and killed members of identical beliefs of the alleged founders. That is merely an attempt to rationalize the present in a non-painful way, it is, however, delusional. Thus Mr. VIII brought, or helped initiate, along with some low-life prelates, religious identity confusion, religious experimentation and the birth of the rational for the existence of the Anglican Church, which tries legitimatize itself by harkening back to the fifth century when it was Catholic and claiming that as its start, which is real nonsense. If one wishes to say that Christianity started in England x number of years before Henry, well that would be true, but certainly NOT the Anglican Church. The Anglican Church is the result of religious abortion, perpetrated on the people in England by Mr. VIII, his minions, and some evil prelates. It resulted in hundreds of years of persecution of the actual church founded by Catholics many centuries before. The odd-ball claim of the Anglican Church somehow having its roots connected to the actual Catholics who founded Christianity in England is incorrect since such connection was effectively severed long ago shortly after Mr. VIII. There is no Apostolic succession as can be proven by the rejection of Apostolic teaching, conformity to authority established by Christ alone, and myriad other things from female priests and female bishops to the openly homosexually "married" clergy, stances on abortion, birth control, and on and on. As the years progress, with separation from Rome, and the legitimate authority put in place by God Himself, the severed vine withers, rots, decays, and ends in anarchy as is inevitable when one does not obey God, and as one can see with the 26000 plus free-lance protestant churches. If anything is proven, it is this, one severs himself from the church founded by God at great peril to his soul, his nation, and ultimately to the world. Christ prayed that all should be one, He did this in the garden, failure to submit to legitimate authority established by Christ is to reject HIs prayer. There is exactly ONE option for the unity of Christians, and that is the mother church herself, there is no other on earth guaranteed b y God Himself.

[@alhilford2345]

John jon : You are correct. Thank you for pointing this out.

[@johnjon1823]

Thank you, you are welcome!

[@colinlavelle7806]

WOW John that is a very long reply to digest. I get very tired of people (historians) getting their facts wrong. The claim that the late medieval catholic church in England was decadent or indecay is an urban myth. The church was strong and vigorous and the English were devout catholics. The clergy on the whole were well educated most of the bishops were educated abroad or at Cambridge or Oxford. The Benedictines and Dominicans (for example) had houses at Oxford University for the education of their religious. Henry VIII's challenge to Rome was based on lagalities and the very desperate need for a male heir to guarantee the somewhat 'shaky' claim to the throne that the Tudors held. The English Reformation represented a violent rupture from a popular and theologically respectable religious system. The idea of a 'national' church (established by Law) by any standards is an oxymoron.

[@x8lover]

The trouble is mainly the hierarchy who unable to do this. Ordinary catholics are on the whole are able to enter into a discussion and see another point of view. But there are some that are stubborn and take a hard line view. Its the clergy that are the barrier to communion. Lets break this barrier down Some Catholic doctrine is defective such as marainology and the treasury of merit as it is none biblical.

[@alhilford2345]

Philip Douglas What is "..treasury of merit..." ?

[@user-uu5zv9qw1y]

Catholic doctrine is not defective

[@MapleAnglican]

@MrHistoryhelp Thank you very much.

[@Liminalplace1]

I don't think the "doctrine is as important as the sense of identity and willingness to dialogue within communion. Protestant maintaining "sola scriptura" presents a barrier, not because it isn't correct, but because it opens the door to millions of self interpretations

[@Liminalplace1]

I watched all of your summary of the history, very simplified and generally a good information. Especially the non-jursors explanation I found informative. Excellent work. But this doesn't provide a history of anglicanism before King Henry VIII, which is apart of the case for "Anglicanism" per se as being distinct from general Protestantism and can be used as a case against Roman Catholicism and a bridge to Orthodoxy. You omitted the Old Catholic Utrecht bishops consecration of C of E bishops

[@colinlavelle7806]

There was no 'Anglicanism' before Henry VIII....the church in England was the catholic church. Henry had Parliament declare him to be head of the Church of England (that is the existing catholich church in England). It was later during the reign of Edward VI and Elizabeth I that the church took on the appearance as Reformist/Anglican.

[@Liminalplace1]

@@colinlavelle7806 I think you need to research the Synod of Whitby in AD 664 where a chain of events began that absorbed the Celtic Church under the Roman church and the installation of Theodore of Tarsus as Archbishop of Canterbury. All Henry the Viii effectively did was severe the previous tie to Rome. The Celtic Church had legitimate bishops and that even sent delegates to Ecumenical councils. What you claim is just Catholic propaganda not actual history.

[@amosnaftali2495]

The Leviticus verse is about having adulterous sex with your brother's wife not forbidding the marriage to your brother's wife after she's a widow which Levitical law allowed, maybe if the bible was in Hebrew instead of Latin then to English there wouldve been accurate translations smh.

[@amosnaftali2495]

The Old Testament allows marriage and divorce for rabbis, prophets and even polygamy Catholicism is a fake religion

[@amosnaftali2495]

Holy day is Saturday not Sunday, how come no one grows beards and where's the Kosher laws? Jesus was a rabbi

[@colinlavelle7806]

@@amosnaftali2495 Catholicism in not a fake religion....lets keep things nice and don't be so offensive.