Understanding Henry\'s Reformation. | Historical Debates | Forum

Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Understanding Henry's Reformation.
March 23, 2010
6:43 pm
Avatar
ipaud
Ireland
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 212
Member Since:
June 19, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I have often heard that if Christianity was a fiction, why has it lasted over 2,000 years?

The Church of England almost 500, with many of their reforms adopted by the Roman Catholic church in Vatican II  before then and since.

The “Church of Rome” 500 years ago was full of very good and religious people with unfortunately, the rotten apples at the top of the barrel. Religious teaching was given to the christian people by church as the bible and most other literature was in Latin and not widely available to the people. The “Church of Rome” could not be held up as being free of scandal and controversy and Regarding Henry, was bordering on “The kettle calling the pot black.”  

The reforms that Henry initiated hold up to the test of time and remain to a large degree unchanged today. Henry VIII made most of the reforms after the death of Anne Boleyn, not because of her, but because of his own beliefs. Henry was influenced by Erasmus and was quite a scholar in religious matters and had been educated in understanding the bible and was well read in religious learning of that time. The way that the reforms were brought in were extreme and the choices for many were Henry's way or die for your faith. Regardless, the Church of England lives on, pretty much as it was first started by Henry.

I live in Ireland, we here, 500 years on, have controversy after controversy that goes all the way to Rome and back in our Catholic Church. I can see in peoples attitudes here, what a reformation must have looked and felt like. In Henry's case, it must be said, he stood up for his beliefs and made the changes that he felt were necessary.

If it was not this, then it would be something else?

March 26, 2010
6:11 am
Avatar
Hannah
Belfast
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 127
Member Since:
December 8, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Brilliant post, Ipaud. Agree completely. I'm in Belfast myself, and we are feeling the effects of the controversies too. Just the other day it emerged that an eminent churchman, Cardinal Brady; paid victims of sexual abuse to keep silent about their ordeal. I know as well, that the country as a whole is still reeling from the Ryan Report in to sexual abuse.

Be daly prove you shalle me fynde,nTo be to you bothe lovyng and kynde,

April 10, 2010
3:17 am
Avatar
Claire
Admin
Forum Posts: 959
Member Since:
February 16, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Interesting post, Paudie, and, yes, Hannah, it is so sad that the Church is being rocked to the core, to the Pope himself at the moment.

I think there is always going to be corruption in the Church because it is an organisation built by man who is ultimately flawed. Yes, the Church, either Protestant or Catholic, has Jesus as its cornerstone, Faith as its basis, but its run by committees and boards of people who all have their own opinions and agendas. When man comes into the mix things go wrong, the Church will never be perfect and we will always be fighting corruption.

It's very easy for us to look at Henry VIII, and Anne for that matter, and see their actions as politically driven and convenient. “Oh, I need a divorce to marry Anne, let's break with Rome and set up a new Church” but I do think that Henry had become very disillusioned with the Church. I think he truly set out to be a “virtuous prince” and he had worked hard in defending the Church from heresy in the past but I think he did become cross with the corruption in the church and I do believe that the Dissolution of the Monasteries was more than a money-making exercise. Definitely a case of “the kettle calling the pot black” and Henry not taking the plank out of his own eye etc. but I think he was angered by the riches of the monasteries, the relics that were not real etc. However much of a sinner and hypocrite he was, Henry was a theologian with a real sense of how the Church should be. Can you believe it? I'm sticking up for Henry! Oh help!!

Anyway, sorry to ramble and go completely off track.

Debunking the myths about Anne Boleyn

May 6, 2010
4:22 am
Avatar
allison
Egypt
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 45
Member Since:
May 5, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Not sure what you mean about Christianity being a  'fiction'.

It certainly exists and did back then.

People all over the world worship Jesus.

I think Claire hit the nail on the head in her post.

What she say's is how Muslims feel about the 'church'.

It went from worshipping  God, to worshiping a prophet.

It's very interesting for me coming from this region, to see across the world especially in the USA this worship of Jesus and no one ever seems to mention God himself. So much emphasis on saints and stuff. It kind of makes Christians not monotheists, which at one time I am sure they were. You can't pray to saints and still be a monotheist can you?

Interesting also to keep the Tudor theme, but in Henry's time the Christians used to pray 5 times a day like Muslims have always done. That's gone nowadays. The head covering gone, virginity on marriage, prostrating in worship, etc.

It's also interesting how it is the clergy/monks who seem to be doing all the praying in Christianity to the set hours like Matins and Compline etc, but the ordinary Christians only ( if ever)  go to church on Sundays and weddings and funerals.

If you asked a Christian in the street what Compline was they'd most likely say a milk drink for invalidsLaugh

Things have certainly changed a lot.

VINCERE VEL MORI

April 4, 2015
10:47 pm
Avatar
Alexandria
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 38
Member Since:
March 26, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The book Henry VIII and the English Reformation by Richard Rex goes into the state of the church both clergy and laity at the time and tries to work out how many people were genuinely converted to Henry’s religious views. It’s a bit hard going, as it’s a proper academic history, but well worth dipping into, especially over the progress of the dissolution of the monasteries and whether Henry started out with the idea of getting rid of all of them or whether this developed over time. The evidence that the support of the large cistercian monasteries for the pilgrimage of grace was the final straw for Henry is quite convincing. Also a lot of detail on Henry’s havering about allowing the bible in English and to whom. He seems to have gone back on this at least once, and tried to restrict it to clergy and gentry, the rest of us peasants of course couldn’t be trusted with it.

Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 214

Currently Online:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Anyanka: 2337

Boleyn: 2285

Sharon: 2115

Bella44: 933

DuchessofBrittany: 846

Mya Elise: 781

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 0

Members: 427580

Moderators: 0

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 13

Topics: 1711

Posts: 23074

Newest Members:

FloydArect, walwera, jffrsnfrst, Bearustault, KdyyaVzacype, loveawake.ru

Administrators: Claire: 959