Thank you! You have something almost right. Changes occurred much earlier than you have stated. In fact, there were small changes constantly being created by those who would not accept nor bow down to either Kings or Popes all through the centuries. The 13th century, after the real dark days of religious attempts to conquer the world, was somewhat of a catalyst leading to a complete overthrow of papal supremacy in 1870 in Italy. It also led to men examining the scriptures more deeply because of the Greek manuscripts that were surfacing from the Eastern libraries that were not destroyed by the Moslems.
Trying to bring up all the history in this sort of media is doomed to fail, for it requires a person to study many, many years to glimpse what happened and put it together in one's mind. All one can do it bring up bits and pieces, and apply them to the current discussion for points, not scholarly discussion. You know what I mean?
Anyway, it's great to see someone realize at least a little part of the total history involved. However, in England, prior to Henry VIII's break with Rome, there were many churches in England that had nothing to do with either Rome or Henry's new church, and they were also established before the Reformation of Luther or Calvin.
Obviously you are correct about change starting beforehand. There was the Magna Carta in England and William Wallace's famous revolt in Scotland that resulted in Robert the Bruce assuming power. However, in reality these were actually revolts by wealthy noblemen against kings, the lives of the common people were little changed.
The 13th century, after the real dark days of religious attempts to conquer the world, was somewhat of a catalyst leading to a complete overthrow of papal supremacy in 1870 in Italy.
Let's be honest here, the "religious attempts to take over the world" were by the Muslims, the Crusades (and I will acknowledge that there were abuses here) was a reaction to this. Additionally, from the time of the Avignon popes in the 14th Century onward, the papacy's political control was at best contained to a portion of Italy.
Trying to bring up all the history in this sort of media is doomed to fail, for it requires a person to study many, many years to glimpse what happened and put it together in one's mind. All one can do it bring up bits and pieces, and apply them to the current discussion for points, not scholarly discussion. You know what I mean?
I have always loved history and my favorite area is medieval Europe. I have long recognized that there was unspeakable and unnecessary bloodshed surrounding the Reformation; however, I am also aware that there is more than enough blame to go around. The other reality is that the "civilized" world was far more violent then than it is today, it was the norm to settle political disputes with bloodshed (and as much as anything the Catholic Church recognized that there would be a loss of income as the result of the Reformation).
However, in England, prior to Henry VIII's break with Rome, there were many churches in England that had nothing to do with either Rome or Henry's new church, and they were also established before the Reformation of Luther or Calvin.
True, but the political power in England was tied to the Catholic Church and Henry VIII's break with the Church was PURELY political. It is also worth noting that Charles V (the Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain) sacked Rome in May of 1527 and the pope became a virtual prisoner and this was the exact same time when Henry was seeking to annul his marriage. Charles V was without question the most powerful man in the world at that time and he was the nephew of Henry's wife, Catherine of Aragon. Because Catherine of Aragon had given birth to Henry's children, an annulment would legally make her a whore and the children bastards. Charles V WAS NOT going to let this occur.