11677Re: Schismatic Christian Sects & political considerations - was HMMM......
- Nov 3, 2007Huzzah, I knew there was someone out there who KNEW!
--- In email@example.com, julian wilson <smnco37@...>
> COMMENTvarious Christian sects separated from the original "one True
> Congratulations on a very informative thumbnail sketch of why
[Christian] Church" - the Church of Rome.
>the English King Henry VII only married once, and died in 1509, - 29
> Allow me please one small but important historical correction -
years prior to the split with Rome.
> It was his son, King Henry VIII who had 6 wives, and caused thefounding of The Church of England.
> And the Schism [generally dated to 1538] had more to do with thePapacy playing politics, and interfering in the internal temporal
affairs of Christian countries, - by requiring the "annointed"
Sovereigns of those to acknowledge the overall Primacy of the Papacy
as to a "temporal" Overlord - which was really the cause of the
> The refusal to allow Henry VIII to divorce Katharine of Aragonis now generally accepted as having been - for King Henry - the "last
[political] straw which broke the camel's back", because it had wide-
ranging tactical and strategic military and trading implications, -
since England's traditional continental enemies - France and Spain -
had acknowledged Papal primacy.
> The refusal to sanction the Royal Divorce was merely thesmall "overt" reason magnified for public consumption; which allowed
the multitude of other political reasons to remain "covert", and
hence to avoid King Henry's .Government giving serious insult to
other powerful States with whom England was then notionally "at
> What insult? The unwritten/unspoken one that thesupposedly "absolute" Monarchs of France/ Spain/ etc. - were not
actually the supreme authorities of their own Realms, because they
obeyed the dictates of the Papacy under several levels of implied
threat - that of "national Excommunication" being the ultimate
sanction, - which might cause a national uprising by
the "commonality" in mortal teroor of their own souls - which could
then lose the Throne to the reigning Royal House.
> Matthew Baker.
- << Previous post in topic