How do Protestants rationalize King Henry VIII, and his selfish non-spiritual motivation?

[Roy5]

As I read these posts, these three things came to mind, perhaps not closely enough related to the topic???

**1. I've read (years ago) that Adrian IV, the only English Pope, actually gave Ireland as a papal fief to England?** Was that in the days of William the Conqueror? That's a dim recollection I have. One writer even suggested that if England had remained Catholic, likely that Ireland would have become Protestant! Behind their 'religious strife' was a far more important and bitter political battle.

**
2. Killing of Protestants and Catholics was widespread, something of which we all should be ashamed. To accuse one another all these years later is petty. **Since I have a mixed Protestant and Catholic heritage I’m not interested in either attacking or defending the record of one or the other. I do, however, think that the Papacy played a major role in causing the Reformation, in large measure because of serious corruption, but also because it was foolish in the way it handled the Reformers. It advocated the death of some (e. g., Huss), and it declared others (e. g., Luther) as deserving of being killed on the spot - if I remember my history correctly. Had not a prince kept Luther safe from assassination, he likely would have been murdered with Papal approval. And I seem to recall that the Pope ordered a Te Deum Mass to celebrate the slaughter of French Huguenots in the St. Bartholomew Massacre.

 **3. I wrote my undergraduate thesis on St. Thomas Aquinas, whom I admired enormously at the time. I still admire much about his work. However, what a shock when I came across his opinion re heretics.** He favored turning them over to the civil authorities to be executed! This seems to have been the position of the medieval church. If anyone dared to stray from papal doctrine or authority they could and should be exterminated! I think that Protestant hostility toward Catholicism over the years has been motivated in large measure by fear that Catholicism would try to stamp out Protestantism by force if it could. I recall, even in modern times, how Protestantism faced severe discrimination in Spain when Franco was in power. Judging from what I read in some CAF posts there are Catholics who still would favor such a discriminatory policy. Thank God for our Constitution. Thank God, too, that Protestants were enough divided in the early USA that our early leaders insisted upon freedom of religion. (As I recall, 55 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Protestant.)

  God bless folks of every creed, color, culture and country. I'm convinced that God will examine our hearts when we cross over and not care a whit about our pious doctrines or our church affiliation.

 

[Bluegoat]

…But the situation would have come to some sort of a head, eventually, had Hank been a celibate with 10 legitimate male offspring. So to speak.

GKC

That would be quite the accomplishment to have 10 offspring while remaining celibate!

 

[GKC]

That would be quite the accomplishment to have 10 offspring while remaining celibate!

Hence, the “So to speak”.

GKC

 

[GKC]

“I’ve read (years ago) that Adrian IV, the only English Pope, actually gave Ireland as a papal fief to England? Was that in the days of William the Conqueror?”

A little later. You’re thinking of the contentious subject of the Bull Laudabiliter,1155. The topic is of some scholarly controversy, as to existence, content and implications.

GKC

 

[GKC]

Heck, in 1512, Julius II gave Henry the throne of France. Of course, he had to go and get it, himself, and that never worked out, but still…

GKC

 

[Conor7]

Hello all, this is my first time replying here and I apologize in advance if I am rehashing issues that have already been addressed on this thread. I am certain they have been addressed in one form or another, but I didn’t have the patience to read all the responses since this question drives me bonkers.

Thankfully for Protestants, they don’t have to account for the Henry debacle since Henry is not in the least part of their history. Sadly for we Anglicans, we spend a great deal of time defending our faith to Catholics and Protestants alike because of Henry’s presumed responsibility for founding our church.

Most Anglicans would tell you that we owe most of the credit to Elizabeth I, who inherited a nation comprised of both Catholics and Protestants and sought to find common ground between the two factions. This explains why we are often self-described as Protestant, yet Catholic. Henry the VIII is simply one small player in a vast and complex history of the Anglican Communion and its founding. His break from the Catholic Church simply coincided with the English Reformation gaining ground at the time.

Someone correct me if I am not completely factual or over simplifying. (I see GKC is the board’s resident Anglican expert and could really deep dive on this if persuaded.)

Incidentally, the “Henry question” is pretty offensive to most Anglicans - I would say it’s akin to asking a Catholic why they worship Mary. Like you, we grow weary from explaining these urban legends. Additionally, “Catholic Lite” is annoying too, but I have a sense of humor about that one. I like to call Catholics “Deep-fried Anglicans,” but I digress. Hope all this helps and I’ve represented my church well.

Regards.

 

[GKC]

Hello all, this is my first time replying here and I apologize in advance if I am rehashing issues that have already been addressed on this thread. I am certain they have been addressed in one form or another, but I didn’t have the patience to read all the responses since this question drives me bonkers.

Thankfully for Protestants, they don’t have to account for the Henry debacle since Henry is not in the least part of their history. Sadly for we Anglicans, we spend a great deal of time defending our faith to Catholics and Protestants alike because of Henry’s presumed responsibility for founding our church.

Most Anglicans would tell you that we owe most of the credit to Elizabeth I, who inherited a nation comprised of both Catholics and Protestants and sought to find common ground between the two factions. This explains why we are often self-described as Protestant, yet Catholic. Henry the VIII is simply one small player in a vast and complex history of the Anglican Communion and its founding. His break from the Catholic Church simply coincided with the English Reformation gaining ground at the time.

Someone correct me if I am not completely factual or over simplifying. (I see GKC is the board’s resident Anglican expert and could really deep dive on this if persuaded.)

Incidentally, the “Henry question” is pretty offensive to most Anglicans - I would say it’s akin to asking a Catholic why they worship Mary. Like you, we grow weary from explaining these urban legends. Additionally, “Catholic Lite” is annoying too, but I have a sense of humor about that one. I like to call Catholics “Deep-fried Anglicans,” but I digress. Hope all this helps and I’ve represented my church well.

Regards.

I’ve been so deep in the Henry matter, I probably can’t surface again. Been posting on him (he’s a sort of hobby of mine), and his Great Matter, and the times, in general, for years. I partially agree with what you say here. But I don’t find discussion of Hank offensive, though some times ill-informed; cartoon history, as it were. I think he’s a fascinating train wreck. And an excellent exemplar of the complexity of history.

Hank isn’t a monomania; I natter repetitively about other things, too.

GKC

 

[Zhenia]

My grandfather, God love him, was an Episcopalian. He would say he’d never be a Catholic because he would not tell his sins to a man. And I would be thinking that I would never be an Episcopalian because I wouldn’t be in a religion founded by a man who beheaded two of his wives. Never made sense to me either.

I have a funeral director friend who has a very wry sense of humor. I once asked her what religion she belonged to, and she said, “The Church of Adultery”. Dummy me, I thought, “What? She belongs to a church for swingers?” But then when she saw my confused look, she said, “You know, the church where the fat guy chopped off the heads of his wives?”

Oh yeah, THAT one!

 

[psychicharvard]

This explains why we are often self-described as Protestant, yet Catholic. Henry the VIII is simply one small player in a vast and complex history of the Anglican Communion and its founding. .

You are Protestant not Catholic. I’m sure if you ask a Catholic priest and any Catholic he/she will say you are Protestant. End of story. You can say you’re a little of both just like I could say that Chaz Bono is a woman with a penis, but ask any person with a penis and they will give you another answer. And Chaz Bono could also say a real woman is “serious woman” but it won’t change the fact that Chaz is not a woman.

His [Henry VIII] break from the Catholic Church simply coincided with the English Reformation gaining ground at the time

That’s like saying the Russians didn’t beat the U.S. in the “Space Race”, their going into outer space in 1961 only coincided with the era of space exploration. Before Henry broke with Rome the Reformation had only taken hold in parts of Germany and the Netherlands. If Henry had stayed Roman Catholic the Reformation never would have taken hold in England because Henry VIII would have annihilated any threat to his power or religion of his Royal Family.

I have no idea why so many people are in denial with the fact that Henry VIII’s break with Rome is the reason their religion took hold and began at all. Accept it, deal with it, but for goodness sake please quit trying to avoid it. The rest of us know history no matter how many people want to deny it.

 

[GKC]

You are Protestant not Catholic. I’m sure if you ask a Catholic priest and any Catholic he/she will say you are Protestant. End of story. You can say you’re a little of both just like I could say that Chaz Bono is a woman with a penis, but ask any person with a penis and they will give you another answer. And Chaz Bono could also say a real woman is “serious woman” but it won’t change the fact that Chaz is not a woman.

That’s like saying the Russians didn’t beat the U.S. in the “Space Race”, their going into outer space in 1961 only coincided with the era of space exploration. Before Henry broke with Rome the Reformation had only taken hold in parts of Germany and the Netherlands. If Henry had stayed Roman Catholic the Reformation never would have taken hold in England because Henry VIII would have annihilated any threat to his power or religion of his Royal Family.

I have no idea why so many people are in denial with the fact that Henry VIII’s break with Rome is the reason their religion took hold and began at all. Accept it, deal with it, but for goodness sake please quit trying to avoid it. The rest of us know history no matter how many people want to deny it.

You keep using that word denial. The rest of us who know English history, from (at least) the First Statute of Westminster, through the Henrician Acts, have a different view of what would have happened eventually, had Hank (say) received his decree of nullity. A prime threat to the Throne’s power lay (as the Monarchy saw it), in Rome. Much of English history for around 250 years prior to Henry, was aimed at curbing that.

GKC

 

[Cheshangle]

You are Protestant not Catholic. I’m sure if you ask a Catholic priest and any Catholic he/she will say you are Protestant. End of story. You can say you’re a little of both just like I could say that Chaz Bono is a woman with a penis, but ask any person with a penis and they will give you another answer. And Chaz Bono could also say a real woman is “serious woman” but it won’t change the fact that Chaz is not a woman.

That’s like saying the Russians didn’t beat the U.S. in the “Space Race”, their going into outer space in 1961 only coincided with the era of space exploration. Before Henry broke with Rome the Reformation had only taken hold in parts of Germany and the Netherlands. If Henry had stayed Roman Catholic the Reformation never would have taken hold in England because Henry VIII would have annihilated any threat to his power or religion of his Royal Family.

I have no idea why so many people are in denial with the fact that Henry VIII’s break with Rome is the reason their religion took hold and began at all. Accept it, deal with it, but for goodness sake please quit trying to avoid it. The rest of us know history no matter how many people want to deny it.

i) Henry’s break with Rome was a reason why Protestantism took root, but not the reason. There is surely no need for me to repeat that I and to a greater extent other posters here have made about this.

ii) A RC priest might tell us we’re Protestant not catholic, but as I keep saying, my baptism certificate says that I’m a member of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolc Church; I affirm that belief twice weekly when I say the Nicene Creed; and a leaflet I have from the Church of Ireland, entitled “Protestant and Catholic”, explains how as Anglicans we are both.

 

[Conor7]

You are Protestant not Catholic. I’m sure if you ask a Catholic priest and any Catholic he/she will say you are Protestant. End of story. You can say you’re a little of both just like I could say that Chaz Bono is a woman with a penis, but ask any person with a penis and they will give you another answer.

With respect, I’m not sure that’s a valid argument. If you ask an Anglican Priest if we are catholic, he/she would say yes, making the argument moot. Incidentally, to your point regarding Chaz Bono, if he self-identifies as a man, personally, I would say he’s a man. But, that is neither here, nor there.

Of my friends who are Catholic, all of them acknowledge that Anglicans are catholic. Perhaps more so than I do. But, again, does it even matter? I could find as many Catholics who dispute this, yourself included.

I have no idea why so many people are in denial with the fact that Henry VIII’s break with Rome is the reason their religion took hold and began at all. Accept it, deal with it, but for goodness sake please quit trying to avoid it. The rest of us know history no matter how many people want to deny it.

Personally, whether Henry is directly or indirectly responsible for the English Reformation is of little consequence to me. I’m glad it happened. I’m proud to be an Episcopalian. And, to the original posters question, all I am saying is don’t ascribe the Henry problem to all Protestants. It’s an uniquely Anglican situation.

 

[Roy5]

Three quick thoughts.

(1) It’s rather shameful, in my view, that so many Christians continue to hammer one another nearly 500 years later with their particular interpretation of history long gone. If we spent nearly as much time and energy working toward understanding and simple human kindness we’d be doing a better job of reflecting our common Christian faith.

(2) So much of our viewpoint seems to be rooted in fierce tribal loyalties that many people inherit from their tradition. Converts or reverts, of course, are even more likely to be militant than others. I frequently run into former Catholics - some now Protestants, others non-religious - who can be far more critical of Catholicism than any Protestants I happen to know. In fact, most Protestants in my circle of friends have an 'agree to disagree' attitude. They say, in effect: if you want to be a Catholic, fine. But as for me, they continue, I cannot honestly accept this or that about the Catholic faith. Most of them balk at the authoritarian nature of the church and treasure what they regard as their freedom to accept or reject controversial doctrines re the Eucharist, Mary, birth control, etc. They are, in effect, sincere 'free-thinking' Christians.

(3) Just read this morning a review of a new book by John Julius Norwich about the Popes over the centuries. Sounds informative and exciting. Title: “Absolute Monarchs”. Looking forward to getting it.

 

[schaick]

When I was 14 I had and aunt who married into the family. She was presbyterian and attempted to pull me and my sister away from Catholicism and into her religion. But one thing she could never answer for me is, How can one justify a religion that was brought about on King Henry VIII selfish desire to divorce his wife? I suppose if King Henry VIII was on a spiritual path it could have some credibility, but he only broke from the Catholic Church because they wouldn’t allow his divorce and so from that he adopted Protestantism as the new religion of England, and then altered the Bible. And so England adopting Protestantism and putting it upon it’s subjects, and England being a strong nation in Europe made Protestantism grow strong. But if King Henry VIII hadn’t wanted a divorce then Protestantism would have either faded or remained small in numbers. So, my question is how can one have such profound faith in a religion that had it’s origins in a selfish King who only used it as a tool to gain a legitimate male heir? I’m not trying to be mean, but it is true. I just want to know if anyone has an answer to this that would make me understand how some Protestants can be so very self-righteous in their religion given it’s dubious origins? I do want to understand but no as of yet has given me any solid explanation. So please…anyone?

How do Catholics rationalize some of the disgusting popes in history, and their selfish non-spiritual motivation?

 

[schaick]

This is a question in all seriousness:
How do any Christians rationalize some of the disgusting Church leaders in history, and their selfish non-spiritual motivation?

Christ must be their leader. The Bible final authority.

 

[LemonAndLime]

This is a question in all seriousness:
How do any Christians rationalize some of the disgusting Church leaders in history, and their selfish non-spiritual motivation?

Christ must be their leader. The Bible final authority.

Open a new thread. The title of this thread is quite clear what we discuss here. If you do not, the moderators may delete posts as one rule of the forum is to remain on-topic.

 

[KathleenGee]

The answer to your question is this:

"Like a lamb led to the slaughter or a sheep before the shearers, he was silent and opened not his mouth.

Oppressed and condemned, he was taken away, and who would have thought any more of his destiny?

When he was cut off from the land of the living, and smitten for the sin of his people,
a grave assigned him among the wicked and a burial place with evildoers, though he had done no wrong nor spoken any falsehood."

Christ established only one Church, the rock of Peter. It is Christ’s saving power, His sacraments of life, forgiveness, and mercy upon we place our faith and hope. We do not look to men, but to Christ present in His church, irregardless of obvious failures of those placed in high position.

It is Christ who saves us, not man.

And Christ’s saving grace and power, His forgiveness far exceeds all the sins humanity has sinned in the past, or today, or in the future to come.

Our focus is on Christ alone as Roman Catholics.