What influence did King Henry VIII of England have on Protestant, non-Catholic Christianity?

[Gabriel_of_12]

Immorality, murder and down right evilness was not limited to Henry VIII. By the way, The Roman Catholic church gave its seal of approval to the leaders of France, Spain etc. If you question the Christianity of the puritans, I guess you question the Christianity of the above listed Roman Catholics who participated and celebrated in such an unchristian and uncatholic action.

This all proves that we are all sinners and none are perfect. We could all sit back and cast stones at each other, or point to the splinter in each others eye (bring to mind a certain teaching of our Lord). Or we could act like Christian brothers/sisters are suppose to act with each other.

Thank you I rest my case; King Henry’s seperation from the Roman Catholic church started many immoral conflicts, murders, theft, property consfications, political take overs etc.

I will not challenge you by listing the many incidents of evil brought about by Protestants which exceeds the Catholic Kings by far. Just to mention the total history of the Ireland takeover by Protestants and Puritans would exceed the numbers of death and evil acts any Catholic King who came to the defense or offense to protect the innocent.

So you see, it depends on which side you view history from. Needless to say, King Henry’s pride to be his own pope, seperating himself and the English people (not all English people) from the Roman Catholic church breathed evil into the concious of man to seperate themselves from God, to make themselves god.

 

[grampben]

I will not challenge you by listing the many incidents of evil brought about by Protestants which exceeds the Catholic Kings by far. Just to mention the total history of the Ireland takeover by Protestants and Puritans would exceed the numbers of death and evil acts any Catholic King who came to the defense or offense to protect the innocent.

Ah you mentioned Irish ‘history’!

What about the presbyterians who fought with the catholics against the established church?

The conquest of Ireland was for imperialist reasons, not religious reasons.

 

[GKC]

Thank you I rest my case; King Henry’s seperation from the Roman Catholic church started many immoral conflicts, murders, theft, property consfications, political take overs etc.

I will not challenge you by listing the many incidents of evil brought about by Protestants which exceeds the Catholic Kings by far. Just to mention the total history of the Ireland takeover by Protestants and Puritans would exceed the numbers of death and evil acts any Catholic King who came to the defense or offense to protect the innocent.

So you see, it depends on which side you view history from. Needless to say, King Henry’s pride to be his own pope, seperating himself and the English people (not all English people) from the Roman Catholic church breathed evil into the concious of man to seperate themselves from God, to make themselves god.

No, I think you are thinking of original sin there.

GKC

 

[adrift]

But Henry never received a divorce. Never wanted one.

GKC

From his actions I would say he wanted not just one but many divorces or were you just being funny

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Ah you mentioned Irish ‘history’!

What about the presbyterians who fought with the catholics against the established church?

The conquest of Ireland was for imperialist reasons, not religious reasons.

Thank you, King Henry’s influence

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

No, I think you are thinking of original sin there.

GKC

Your right King Henry’s pride was an act seperating himself from God like original sin.

 

[grampben]

Thank you, King Henry’s influence

What’s your point? I was correcting your distorted view of Irish history.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

What’s your point? I was correcting your distorted view of Irish history.

I call your attention to the post. Iam well aware of your off topic language. But your commentary supported my view that King Henry VIII influenced the evil you stated.

P.S you cannot conclude of a distorted Irish history because I have not given it. I have only mentioned an historical event.

 

[GKC]

Your right King Henry’s pride was an act seperating himself from God like original sin.

Even were one to think so, I don’t think we can lay it, all that you said, in your last sentence, at Hank’s feet.

GKC

 

[grampben]

I call your attention to the post. Iam well aware of your off topic language. But your commentary supported my view that King Henry VIII influenced the evil you stated.

P.S you cannot conclude of a distorted Irish history because I have not given it. I have only mentioned an historical event.

You seem to think his religion influenced his immorality?

 

[ralphinal]

I think that it is fair to say that his impact was more on society as a whole than on just non-Catholic Christianity.

Think about this: prior to Henry VIII, even the nobility was subject to the Church. After him, the rules shifted. Suddenly, nobility had no one directly over them to answer to. I think that this was the begginning of the end for monarchies in Europe. Slowly, the people began to pull power away from them. After all, how divine is the divine right of kings if the faith itself is under their control and not the clergy?

 

[SyCarl]

Pope Gregory XIII was so horrified by the cruelties of the massacre that he wept for the many innocent dead, and refused to receive the assassin Maurevert in audience.

Not quite.

t was on 2 September that the first rumours of what had occurred in France reached Rome. Danes, secretary to Mandelot, Governor of Lyons, bade M. de Jou, Commander at Saint-Antoine, to inform the pope that the chief Protestant leaders had been killed in Paris, and that the king had ordered the governors of the provinces to seize all Huguenots. Cardinal de Lorraine, when thus informed, gave the courier 200 écus and Gregory XIII gave him 1000. The pope wanted bonfires lighted in Rome, but Férals, the French Ambassador, objected on the ground that official communication should first be received from the king and the nuncio…Then with all the cardinals he repaired to the Church of St. Mark for the Te Deum, and prayed and ordered prayers that the Most Christian King might rid and purge his entire kingdom of the Huguenot plague…Gregory XIII ordered a jubilee in celebration of both events and engaged Vasari to paint side by side in one of the Vatican apartments scenes commemorative of the victory of Lepanto and of the triumph of the Most Christian King over the Huguenots. Finally, he had a medal struck representing an exterminating angel smiting the Huguenots with his sword, the inscription reading: Hugonottorum strages.

The horror is only a supposition although he did refuse to see Maurevert.

A rather involved account by Brantôme leads us to think that, becoming better informed, he grew angry at the news of such barbarity

Both quotes from newadvent.org/cathen/13333b.htm

Atrocities by any side are not justifiable.

 

[MarkBrown]

Thank you I rest my case; King Henry’s seperation from the Roman Catholic church started many immoral conflicts, murders, theft, property consfications, political take overs etc.

I will not challenge you by listing the many incidents of evil brought about by Protestants which exceeds the Catholic Kings by far. Just to mention the total history of the Ireland takeover by Protestants and Puritans would exceed the numbers of death and evil acts any Catholic King who came to the defense or offense to protect the innocent.

So you see, it depends on which side you view history from. Needless to say, King Henry’s pride to be his own pope, seperating himself and the English people (not all English people) from the Roman Catholic church breathed evil into the concious of man to seperate themselves from God, to make themselves god.

What color is the sky in the world you created for yourself?

Evil kings etc, which Julian fancied himself a general, have been the norm for humanity since the garden. Not just since the Reformation.

But I guess in your world, the serpent was Ole Hank.

Be carefull when the only person who is correct is the one staring back at you in the mirror.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I think that it is fair to say that his impact was more on society as a whole than on just non-Catholic Christianity.

Think about this: prior to Henry VIII, even the nobility was subject to the Church. After him, the rules shifted. Suddenly, nobility had no one directly over them to answer to. I think that this was the begginning of the end for monarchies in Europe. Slowly, the people began to pull power away from them. After all, how divine is the divine right of kings if the faith itself is under their control and not the clergy?

Very good post ralphinal; I believe others here want to continue digesting different view points of history instead of answering the post. I am tempted to engage historical facts, names, dates and events from Protestant England and what resulted. But you cleared up nicely what I wanted to say so ditto to you.

Besides, I would call posters attention to the result of King Henry’s seperation from the Roman Cathoilc church. What is the Anglican church today, is it the same as when King Henry left it? For all that matters where is Europe today? Christian or Muslim? or other?

 

[SIA]

adrift:
You left out Scripture passages that support divorce on the grounds of sexual immorality. Are you aware of those?

 

[Jimmy_B]

You left out Scripture passages that support divorce on the grounds of sexual immorality. Are you aware of those?

http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=100333&rendTypeId=4

Hello SIA,

*In your opinion then, who ultimately has the authority to grant a divorce? Who determines the grounds for the divorce? I do not mean in a secular or civil, legal sense, I mean in a Christian sense. *

*Can couples “divorce” themselves or should they go specifically to your denomination, if the Catholic Church doesn’t act immediately and allow it? *

*Should we let the secular world decide? Should there be any sort of inquiry completed first, to determine what actually happened in the marriage? *

*What about marriage counseling? Is that out of the question? *

*What if the couple has children together? *

What about the statistics, which show that a child has a much greater likelihood of being abused by a stepparent.

What about the statistics the show divorce-parent, single-parent homes equal poverty, a higher, high school drop-out rate for their children and a higher risk that that child may become involved in criminal activity….higher risk of teenage pregnancy and out-of-wedlock marriages of those children….and so on and so forth.

*And… the viscous cycle continues….This occurs because of the breakdown in marriage and because many today, do not honor or respect the Holy Sacrament of Marriage. *

*Many today forgo marriage altogether and then have children out of wedlock. *

*A shallow, simplistic, liberal attitude towards divorce, leads to a shallow, simplistic, liberal attitude towards marriage. *

All statistics show that Catholics have a lower rate of divorce. Why do you think that is?

*Maybe we should grant a divorce to anyone who asks for it. Oh, that’s right, we (society) already does that in most cases. *

*Who grants the divorce? *
*Who determines the grounds for the divorce? *
Who defines or creates the guidlines?
*Who has the authority to do so? *
*W**ho has the authority to separate what God has put together? Where do they derive their authority to severe the marriage that God and the couple created. *
What is the process in which this should occur….
*in your opinion? *

Marriage is a Holy Sacrament!

Sometimes, the quickest answer is not the right answer. Sometimes, the solution to a problem is not the easy one, or, as easy as one might think. Sometimes, problems cannot be explain or solved by citing a single Bible verse, taken out of context. Finally, sometimes, patients, prayer and time are required.

*Unfortunately, we live in a world today where people have no patients, instant gratification is the norm, and for many this need to “fix their problem, right now”, actually creates more problems for them in the future. *

Many of my comments here, are of a general nature but any apinion that you might be able to add here would be helpful in this discussion.

I would like to read your response to the questions posed here.

Thank you for your post.

Peace.

 

[Jimmy_B]

***I believe that King Henry’s ego, (name removed by moderator)atients, immorality and lack of any healthy Christian formation, along with his own personal desires, were the driving forces, which lead to his unraveling and to him murdering his wives and countless others, as well as his dividing the people of England and destroying his own country. These same factors were also, what caused him to go “Protestant” and try to take the rest of his country with him, not any “truths”, “discovered” in Protestantism and not any fault of the Catholic Church. He didn’t get his way and plenty paid for it, plain and simply. ***

*He used Martin Luther, manipulated Christianity and exploited Protestantism for his own personal gain, not for God, not for religion, not for his country and definitely not for his people. He struck a devastating blow to Christianity, which is still felt to this day.

What would have happened if King Henry had been patient and submitted to the authority of the Catholic Church, on the morale issues of Marriage and divorce?

Would the Church be divided, or as divided today, if not for King Henry?

Ego, (name removed by moderator)atients, immorality and lack of any healthy Christian formation, along with one’s own personal desires taking precedence, creates the same problems for people today, as it did in King Henry’s time. These same factors are also the cause for many divorces and broken families today.

Rejecting a Christian truth found in Catholicism during King Henry’s time was as damaging as it is in our time.

Rejecting the Catholic Church - Bad then!
*Rejecting the Catholic Church - Bad now! *

Your thoughts?*

 

[Tsuwano]

I can see that this thread is just another opportunity for Catholics to get some more cheap shots in at King Henry VIII just as they have Martin Luther, John Calvin and anyone else that spoke any disagreement with Rome.

Unfortunately, I think you may be correct. As a devout Catholic I sometimes cringe at the way some of my fellow Catholics approach the Reformation and its leaders, as if there weren’t already too many stones cast in this eternal debate. That is why I would really like to hear the Protestant view of these various reformers and whether they think the Protestant movement was influenced positively or negatively by them. Naturally, I may disagree in part theologically with some of these men and women, but as time progresses I think the Church has come to recognize that there was a sincerity of faith on the part of the reformers that should be acknowledged and that the Reformation has helped the Church to reflect more deeply on its role as the “bride of Christ.” For this alone, the Church owes a debt of gratitude to the Reformers, and though our separation is indeed a painful tragedy, it is clear to me that the grace of God has worked beautifully among the Protestant communities as well as among Catholic communities.

 

[Tsuwano]

Charles IX of France, or his mother depending on which historian you believe, orchastrated the ST. Bartholomew’s day massacre. 10-30000 French Protestants were murdered by Catholics for political (and religious) reasons. Outside of France the only person who seemed to celebrate was Pope Gregory XIII who had a Te Deum sung and struck a medal. Pope John Paul II @1997 apologized. IIRC seemed Pope John Paul II apologized for other actions of the church from history.

Immorality, murder and down right evilness was not limited to Henry VIII. By the way, The Roman Catholic church gave its seal of approval to the leaders of France, Spain etc. If you question the Christianity of the puritans, I guess you question the Christianity of the above listed Roman Catholics who participated and celebrated in such an unchristian and uncatholic action.

This all proves that we are all sinners and none are perfect. We could all sit back and cast stones at each other, or point to the splinter in each others eye (bring to mind a certain teaching of our Lord). Or we could act like Christian brothers/sisters are suppose to act with each other.

Thank you for your insightful post. I endorse your final paragraph totally.

 

[Jimmy_B]

Thank you for your insightful post. I endorse your final paragraph totally.

Hello Tsuwano,

The question posed here is -

"What influence did King Henry VIII of England have on Protestant, non-Catholic Christianity?"

I don’t see how changing the subject and not answering the question is “insightful”. It looks like typical, Protestant tactics to me, deflect, re-direct and change the subject, rather than answer the question. I could be wrong but that’s what it looks like to me.

It would be like me asking, “What made the Ford Pinto dangerous?”… And your response is, “Chevy trucks are dangerous”.

Why is it that anything negative in Protestant history or in Protestant doctrine is ignored and avoided and yet, Catholics are constantly bombarded with questions like, “why do Catholics worship Mary” and they are expected to provide an answer? Catholics are constantly asked to explain and defend those things considered “negative” by Protestants.

I have no problem answering any “Catholic” question, posed by any Protestant.

Is there a double standard here?

His off-topic response or non-response is typical for many posters here and is more of anti-Catholic statement, which might be better used to start another discussion. Sounds like a topic for another thread to me.

By not answering the question here, from the Protestant perspective, he has caused me to post something off-topic and then the discussion starts to deteriorate from there. Do you understand my point here?

Once again, the question here is –

"What influence did King Henry VIII of England have on Protestant, non-Catholic Christianity?”

A simple answer and explanation would be nice.

I hope that you can appreciate that my comments here are well intended and it is not my intention to single any one person out. A majority of my post here is of a general nature, where I am addressing, what I see as a common problem with these discussions.

Thank you for your post.

Peace