[Sherman Logan]

The author claims that Henry VIII's break with the Roman Church was essential for the development of modern England and therefire by extension to of the USA. That if England had stayed linked to the Church the Industrial Revolution and indeed modern society would not developed, at least not as it did.

Given some of the pro- and anti-Catholic sentiment on FR, I thought this would make a nice hand grenade to toss into the forum.

I highly recommend reading of the entire article before posting comments or disagreements.

[NewJerseyJoe]

Henry VIII was someone who publicly showed that God's Will can be disposed with whenever it is "inconvenient," thus setting an example for future licentiousness, sin, and crime. Was he the first to do this? No. But he was probably the first head of state to do so, and to enforce his heresy by rule of "law."

Also one of history's great murderers.

Not someone to look up to by any stretch.

[2ndClassCitizen]

I would say that Henry VIII had little to do with it.

Martin Luther hit the nail on the head when he nailed his logic to the church door. The church was corrupt, even selling indulgences. The church, in that corrupt state, reminds me of the money changers in the temple, the ones that Jesus threw out.

Martin Luther started something big. The church and its corruption began to fragment as a result of this and many other forces. Attributing everything to Henry VIII is just not logical.

[goodwithagun]

There is a comment about the wealth of the Catholic church. My husband is Catholic and my son was baptized Catholic, and I have been thinking about joining the church. I have some reservations, though, and this is one of them. If so many people are impoverished, why can’t the church sell priceless objects and use the money for rice? They are after all, just objects. Painting, sculptures, land, buildings, etc.

[Fractal Trader]

Anglican Ping

[SlapHappyPappy]

I highly recommend reading of the entire article before posting comments or disagreements.

You've been here long enough to know better than to expect that.

[GonzoGOP]

Any good which came from Henry VIII’s break with the Roman church was purely accidental. He was a fat, self indulgent absolutist dictator, who believed that rules applied to others, but never to him. He killed the innocent if their continued existence was inconvenient to him. Henry didn't disband the church out of some religious conviction, or because they were corrupt, but because they wouldn't pay him a cut of what they were taking in.

The closest comparison to Henry VIII in recent times is Bill Clinton. Some good may have come out of the 1990s but it was not by Clinton's design or but simply as an unintended consequence of his own lust and greed. If Bill could have done for Hillary and Monica what Henry did for Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard you can bet he would have.

[Romulus]

The Tudors, beginning with Fat Hank, laid the foundations not for freedom but for the modern police state, including judicial murder, domestic spying, and unrelenting propaganda. Henry was a terrorist and social engineer on a massive scale.

[Ken H]

Thank Henry VIII...

I stopped reading right there!

:)

[frithguild]

The dissolution of the monasteries, which Thomas Cromwell effected for him between 1536 and 1540, broke up the main cells of the Catholic clergy in Henry's realm: it also initiated the greatest change of land ownership in England since the Conquest. Perhaps a quarter of land changed hands, bought by the aristocracy and by a newly emergent gentry and with the revenues going to the Crown.

I think this is a good point. While private property rights were in the ascendancy in England, the Italians were worrying about imprisoning Gallileo because he observed and recorded moons orbiting around Jupiter - which was against the "consensus" perception of the order of the universe.

[sr4402]

One can compare Henry the 8th to King Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel and Pharaoh who opposed God in the book of Exodus. God often raises those whom he wishes "To demonstrate my power" as it says in Romans and influence the course of History for His Purposes and Glory.

King Henry may have done it, thinking it was for his own glory, perhaps going the ways of the kings of this earth, garnering power unto himself. But we in the Presbyterian PCA believe God did it for the purposes of Reforming the Elect to God's Inerrant, Inspired and Eternal Word.

God often uses fallible men, sometimes even despite themselves, towards His purposes. The idea that He would use only infallible men would be laughable.

[AlaskaErik]

Irregardless of what made England so great, here should be no doubt that socialism will be the end of her.

[Wonder Warthog]

Balderdash. The “English Reformation” set the Industrial Revolution BACK by two hundred years. Recent historical research has shown that a bunch of “artisan-monks” at a convent in what was eventually the heart of England’s “iron revolution” area were on the brink of inventing the production of steel. When ole Henry dissolved the monastery, the technology was lost. Imagine where we would be now, if those monks had been allowed to continue their work.

[count-your-change]

Perhaps had there been no Hank the Eight history would have turned out differently but even that is not clear.
What is certain is that no one can say what would be an alternative history. Even being certain about did occur is often in question.

So while the author’s musings are interesting.......

[TheOldLady]

—

[Thumper1960]

Seems to me to be a great argument for keeping government out of religion and religion out of government.