D
Duane1966
Guest
The hierarchy of the Church pre-Reformation was Roman Catholic, post-Reformation, clearly they were not. You are saying since the people were the same, and the hierarchical setup was the same, that they had the right to do with the Church’s property as they pleased? Before the Reformation, their teaching would have aligned with RC doctrine. Post Reformation, clearly not. But doctrine is clearly the most important point in continuity. Using your argument, I could be a preacher in a Christian church, and suddenly start using the Koran instead of the Bible to base sermons on, and no one should get upset. Hey same person, continuity is there. But to the laity the most fundamental thing has changed.
From the website New Advent:
All this drew the king into closerrelations with Cranmer, who was made ambassador to theemperor, and who, a year or two afterwards, despite the fact that he had just marriedOsiander’sniece (his second wife), was summoned home to becomeArchbishopofCanterbury. ThenecessaryBulls and thepalliumwere obtained fromRomeunder threat that the law(referred to again below) for the abolition ofannatesand first-fruitswould be made permanent. The vacillatingClement*— who probablyhopedthat by making every other kind of concession he might be able to maintain the position he had assumedupon the more vital question of thedivorce*— concededBullsandpallium. But to benefit by them it was necessarythat Cranmer should take certain prescribedoathsofobedienceto theHoly See. He took theoaths, but committed to writing asolemnprotest that he considered theoathsin no way binding inconscience, a procedure which even so prejudiced a historian as Mr. H.A. Fisher cannot refrain from describing as a “signal dishonesty.” “If”, asksDr. Lingard, "it besimonyto purchasespiritualoffice by money, what is it to purchase the same byperjury?" The father of the newChurch of England, and future compiler of itsliturgy, was not entering upon his functions under very propitious auspices.
This is normal channels?
By the way, it is my understanding that since Cranmer was married, it made his appointment null and void.
Succession yes. But clearly, illegitimate succession has been shown.
They did not take any RC property. Most importantly, their doctrines did not change from pre-Schism to post-Schism, as doctrine clearly did pre-Reformation to post-Reformation.Why stop at England and Germany? Why not wonder about all the Greek-speaking lands that were “stolen” by the Eastern Orthodox . . .
Yep!