Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How a Protestant spin machine hid the truth about the English Reformation
Telegraph UK blog ^ | Sunday 25 May 2014 | Dominic Selwood

Posted on 05/25/2014 10:52:33 AM PDT by Not gonna take it anymore

. . . . For centuries, the English have been taught that the late medieval Church was superstitious, corrupt, exploitative, and alien. Above all, we were told that King Henry VIII and the people of England despised its popish flummery and primitive rites. England was fed up to the back teeth with the ignorant mumbo-jumbo magicians of the foreign Church, and up and down the country Tudor people preferred plain-speaking, rational men like Wycliffe, Luther, and Calvin. Henry VIII achieved what all sane English and Welsh people had long desired ­– an excuse to break away from an anachronistic subjugation to the ridiculous medieval strictures of the Church.

, . . But the last 30 years have seen a revolution in Reformation research. Leading scholars have started looking behind the pronouncements of the religious revolution’s leaders – Henry VIII, Thomas Cromwell, Thomas Cranmer, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley – and beyond the parliamentary pronouncements and the great sermons. Instead, they have begun focusing on the records left by ordinary English people. This “bottom up” approach to history has undoubtedly been the most exciting development in historical research in the last 50 years. It has taken us away from what the rulers want us to know, and steered us closer towards what actually happened.

(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: History; Prayer; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: adultery; churchhistory; churchofengland; divorce; englishreformation; henryviii; reformation; reformation500; scholars
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-174 next last
This is a very long, very honest look at England and the reformation.
1 posted on 05/25/2014 10:52:33 AM PDT by Not gonna take it anymore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

Exciting topic, very pertinent to debate.


2 posted on 05/25/2014 10:56:35 AM PDT by BeadCounter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore
This is a very long, very honest look at England and the reformation.

Sure it is.
3 posted on 05/25/2014 10:59:38 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BeadCounter

You’re right; thing is, that I think that without the Protestant Reformation, the Puritans never would have had the revolution that culminated in beheading Charles I, throwing out the direct legitimate Stuart line, and bringing in the Hanovers if only because they were Protestant.

Just think, all that chaos because Anne Boleyn didn’t put out for Henry VIII.


4 posted on 05/25/2014 11:03:28 AM PDT by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

It is. For decades now historians - Catholic, Protestant and those of no particular belief - have admitted that the story of the Protestant Reformation in England is little more than a constructed fraud.

Eamon Duffy showed that to be the case, conclusively, many years ago: http://www.amazon.com/The-Stripping-Altars-Traditional-1400-1580/dp/0300108281

http://www.amazon.com/Marking-Hours-English-Prayers-1240-1570/dp/0300170580/ref=pd_sim_b_4?ie=UTF8&refRID=1JES9F0P42F1BSXPVJ21

http://www.amazon.com/Voices-Morebath-Reformation-Rebellion-English/dp/0300098251/ref=la_B001H6KLJG_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401041128&sr=1-2

http://www.amazon.com/Saints-Sacrilege-Sedition-Religion-Reformations/dp/1441181172/ref=la_B001H6KLJG_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401041128&sr=1-5

http://www.amazon.com/Fires-Faith-Catholic-England-under/dp/0300168896/ref=la_B001H6KLJG_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401041128&sr=1-4


5 posted on 05/25/2014 11:06:49 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

This guy writes crypto thrillers. He also takes a shot at bashing the Iraq war.

Nothing about the revival that was taking place during the reformation which replaced ritual with the Bible. I don’t think I will believing what he says.


6 posted on 05/25/2014 11:07:19 AM PDT by what's up (sun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

So what’s so righteous about sticking to the Stuarts.

if dynastic succession is so holy why did we drop it in the US.


7 posted on 05/25/2014 11:11:53 AM PDT by what's up (sun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Thank-you for your research and links. God Bless.


8 posted on 05/25/2014 11:14:47 AM PDT by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

I’ll agree that the Reformation was an imperfect start.


9 posted on 05/25/2014 11:15:21 AM PDT by Genoa (Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

“...all that chaos because Anne Boleyn didn’t put out for Henry VIII.”

It was actually the fertility failure with Katherine of Aragon that led to the chaos.

As for Anne Boleyn, she too failed to bear a son, but she was the mother of Elizabeth I, inarguably one of Britan’s greatest monarchs. For her trouble she got her head chopped off.

Nevertheless I agree, an awful lot of the trouble in the world today has it’s roots in Henry VIII, the original “self-actualizer”.,


10 posted on 05/25/2014 11:16:06 AM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

Quote from the article:

“In addition to the dramatic loss of these cherished protector figures, the parishes were also deprived of around 40 to 50 saints’ “holy days” (holidays) a year, when no servile work was allowed from noon the previous day. This was a dramatic change to the rhythms of life the country had known for centuries. The reformers were keenly aware this would boost economic activity, and welcomed the increase in output it would bring.”

Protestantism was supported by governments because, like Communism, it amassed wealth through theft and squeezing the peasants ever harder. In the process some Protestant governments banned begging which effectively starved out those viewed as unproductive.

“But by the late 1400s and early 1500s, religion had been taken over by the people — most notably in the form of the religious guilds that had mushroomed in every parish. For instance, King’s Lynn had over 70; Bodmin had more than 40.”

Yep, and the participation of common lay people in the religious life of the parish all but disappeared with the coming of Protestantism having been reduced to only formal worship services that everyone had to attend by law.


11 posted on 05/25/2014 11:24:57 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

“It was actually the fertility failure with Katherine of Aragon that led to the chaos.”

A woman who gets pregnant 9 times has no problem with fertility.

“According to J.J. Scarisbrick, Catherine of Aragon had “several miscarriages, three infants who were either stillborn or died immediately after birth (two of them males), two infants who died within a few weeks of birth (one of them a boy) and one girl, Princess Mary”. Dewhurst makes the point that “several” must mean three or more so Scarisbrick is crediting Catherine with a total of nine pregnancies, only one of which gave Henry a living heir and it was only a girl. Hester Chapman writes of Catherine having a total of seven pregnancies, Neville Williams writes of how Henry was “mindful of earlier miscarriages” in his second year of marriage to Catherine, John Bowle writes of six pregnancies and A.F. Pollard suggests a total of around ten pregnancies. If Catherine had nine unsuccessful pregnancies it is little wonder that Henry felt that their marriage was cursed!”

Read more: http://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/the-pregnancies-of-anne-boleyn-and-catherine-of-aragon/#ixzz32kluWgUf


12 posted on 05/25/2014 11:27:51 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

“I’ll agree that the Reformation was an imperfect start.”

Its end is no better either: atheism, communism, hedonism, skepticism, utilitarianism, totalitarianism.


13 posted on 05/25/2014 11:30:50 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
It is. For decades now historians - Catholic, Protestant and those of no particular belief - have admitted that the story of the Protestant Reformation in England is little more than a constructed fraud.

John Wesley, the Methodists in both England and America would all disagree with you.

The Massive Revival that Wesley and his contemporaries sparked in both England and America was in no small part the reason we have an America today.
14 posted on 05/25/2014 11:40:50 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
It is. For decades now historians - Catholic, Protestant and those of no particular belief - have admitted that the story of the Protestant Reformation in England is little more than a constructed fraud.

Propaganda.
15 posted on 05/25/2014 11:44:02 AM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

While I am an American and certainly no authority on British history, I have had a few courses and always understood that Henry’s break with Rome had nothing to do with the desires of the common people, but everything to do with his desire for a son. King’s generally don’t take into account the desires of their subjects; that is the nature of Earthly kings. Alfred the Great may have been an exception. The “spin” in this article is the author starting off with the nonsense that historical opinion has always been that Henry VIII was only yielding to popular consensus.


16 posted on 05/25/2014 11:53:24 AM PDT by odawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

What the article sets forth is more a matter of interpretation than a matter of fact. All my readings indicate acts and events being pretty much as what is reported in the article. What is being emphasized by the article is the current worship of “The Community,” “The Masses,” “The Peasant,” etc. etc. The interpretation offered is narrow in that it overlooks the massive influence of the Nobility and the Clergy. The Protestant revolution did break up the Catholic religion in England and that revolution was effectuated by the LEADERSHIP of those days.


17 posted on 05/25/2014 11:54:29 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jocon307
Although the fertility failure brought things to a head, the fact is that trouble with the Catholic church in Britain had been brewing for years. Henry would never have been able to make the break with Rome unless there hadn't been a considerable amount of popular support for the move. Even then there were several rebellions because of it.

I would argue that the root of all the trouble today really started a century later, when that fanatic idiot Catesby bungled a coup attempt against James I.

18 posted on 05/25/2014 12:00:52 PM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

You’re right; thing is, that I think that without the Protestant Reformation, the Puritans never would have had the revolution that culminated in beheading Charles I, throwing out the direct legitimate Stuart line, and bringing in the Hanovers if only because they were Protestant.

Just think, all that chaos because Anne Boleyn didn’t put out for Henry VIII
...................
In the end however, the puritans were the losers of the the 7th century wars not just in england. The Puritans were Calvinists. As it happened the Calvinists were losers all over Europe of the 17th century wars including the French Heugoneats the Dutch Reformed Church, the German Reformed Church, the Swedish reformed Church, the Swiss Reformed Church. The Scottish presbyterians were also Calvinists.. All these churches bailed out of Europe. The Calvinists were a majority of the USA population at the time of the revolution. However their percentages went into quick decline as they were superceded by the baptists and methodists by the mid 19th century.


19 posted on 05/25/2014 12:05:31 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“A woman who gets pregnant 9 times has no problem with fertility.”

I know things were more difficult in those days, but the purpose of pregnancy is to produce children who make it out of the cradle, so I would still say that she AND HENRY had fertility problems.

In fact, as we now know but they did not, the failure to produce male offspring lies entirely with the father. Henry had a lot of wives and not too many children. I know he had a bastard son, don’t know how old he lived to be, but of his legit children only Elizabeth lived a full live. But of course, as I said above, things were a lot more difficult then.

While one can sympathize with Henry’s desire for a son it’s impossible to condone the lengths he went to to get one.

Divorcing Katherine was bad enough, but the rest of it, just awful.

They were really so violent in those days, and it’s amazing how many of the elites who had great power ended up being executed themselves.

I can’t imagine living at such a time, every day must have seemed fraught with peril.


20 posted on 05/25/2014 12:05:49 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

“...when that fanatic idiot Catesby bungled a coup attempt against James I.”

You may well be right, but that is way too inside English History for me!

I just read those Hillary Mantel books, I enjoyed them very much, but the story they tell is very shocking.

Esp. at the beginning of the first one, I didn’t really know how widespread, and yes, grassroots, the Reformation was, and how resisted it was by those in power.

Of course you know that Henry had been honored as a defender of the faith by the pope, and then look what happened!

So yeah, something was brewing and it wasn’t just the problems of 3 people, to borrow a bit from Casablanca.


21 posted on 05/25/2014 12:10:01 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

Henry VIIIs lust for Anne Boleyn doesn’t explain why the reformation took place in Scotland as well, with even more fanatical zeal. The fact of the matter is that if there wasn’t already a hard core of Lollardist sympathy Henry’s reformation couldn’t have taken hold. Apart from anything else, Henry always considered himself an orthodox catholic his whole life and had no sympathy for theological reform. He just didn’t want the bishop of Rome telling him what to do. Frankly, I’m glad we had the reformation. Roman Catholicism at this time was an economic, social and politically retardant factor that would have prevented the development of modern capitalism and industrialisation. Catholic England was a complete backwater till a protestant ethic transformed the place and emphasised individual liberty over social deference.


22 posted on 05/25/2014 12:10:49 PM PDT by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

Of course; thing is, it started out as a normal interest to beget a male hair, but spiraled into a full blown Reformation at the behest of Anne B. and Thomas Cromwell, who was himself a covert Lutheran. If Henry had wanted to marry a French princess or a Spanish princess then there might not have been problems.

He also wanted an annulment, not a divorce. Essentially Henry wanted the Pope to agree that a women he had married, begat a child (Princess Mary Tudor), and crowned Queen of England declared no more than a woman who had been nothing more than Dowager Princess of Wales and a mistress for near twenty years.

Charles V of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor was nephew to Katherine, predictably saw that as offensive to his aunt’s honor and the reputation of the Imperial Family. When Rome was sacked by the Spanish and Imperial army, the Pope was essentially the prisoner of the Emperor and the Pope as a result could hardly be trusted to give an unbiased decision.

So Henry decided to break England away from Rome and have Archbishop Cranmer grant the annulment (ironically Cranmer was approved by the Pope himself) and declare his marriage null and void. With Anne as his legitimate wife (later reversed at Henry’s convenience).

If Henry had wanted a divorce, it might have happened, but he turned it into a more complicated issue with his determination to essentially repudiate his daughter and brand his wife of so many years as an unwitting mistress/concubine.

“It was actually the fertility failure with Katherine of Aragon”

Yes, but like I said before, Henry made it worse by trying to make it out that his marriage had never existed.


23 posted on 05/25/2014 12:14:01 PM PDT by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

I wonder what things would have been like if in fact Calvinists had been less fanatical. It was after the Restoration that Puritanism became a persecuted doctrine and thankfully we now live in a time when we don’t live in a society that forbids having a good time.

Yet one leftover I have noticed is that we have high standards of a work ethic.


24 posted on 05/25/2014 12:16:35 PM PDT by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

“I know things were more difficult in those days, but the purpose of pregnancy is to produce children who make it out of the cradle, so I would still say that she AND HENRY had fertility problems.”

Nine pregnancies - including stillborn births and live births - means she had no fertility problems. If she were infertile, there would have been no pregnancies.

“In fact, as we now know but they did not, the failure to produce male offspring lies entirely with the father. Henry had a lot of wives and not too many children.”

Actually he had a number of children - at least four of whom made it to the age of 15. Two of those lived to be full adults. Henry acknowledged only one of his natural children: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegitimate_children_of_Henry_VIII

“I know he had a bastard son, don’t know how old he lived to be,”

if you mean Henry Fitzroy, 17.

“but of his legit children only Elizabeth lived a full live.”

Mary lived to be 42. In her day that was a rather full life.

“But of course, as I said above, things were a lot more difficult then.”

They sure were.

“While one can sympathize with Henry’s desire for a son it’s impossible to condone the lengths he went to to get one.”

Agreed: theft, murder, divorce, adultery, schism. Disgusting.

“Divorcing Katherine was bad enough, but the rest of it, just awful.”

Agreed.

“They were really so violent in those days, and it’s amazing how many of the elites who had great power ended up being executed themselves.”

Because they made that possible by sheepishly going along with the tyrant in the first place.

“I can’t imagine living at such a time, every day must have seemed fraught with peril.”

I’m sure it was - and we’ll probably see something akin to it politically in our own day. God help us!


25 posted on 05/25/2014 12:19:15 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

“...a hard core of Lollardist sympathy”

That’s the name! I’ve been trying to remember. I’d never really knew about that until I read the Mantel books. (In truth I might have heard of them years ago but who knows.)

Even though I am a Catholic I can’t disagree with what you say about the Reformation. It does seem that the countries that went Protestant were far more economically successful than the ones that stayed Catholic.

Eh, you can tell from my comments that I’m not expert on these subjects, although they are interesting to me. So, you know, I apologize for any stupidity I may evince here.

I guess Germany would be the place to look at. I remember my brother telling me years ago that Germany was not only divided east and west (as it was at that time) but also north and south, with the north Protestant and the south Catholic.


26 posted on 05/25/2014 12:20:15 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

“Yet one leftover I have noticed is that we have high standards of a work ethic.”

So no one in Christendom had a high standard of work ethic before the Puritans or other Protestants? Really? I think you would have many a guildsman up in arms about that claim. Walk through any medieval cathedral and you’ll see the results of “high standards of a work ethic.”


27 posted on 05/25/2014 12:21:37 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I meant for the US; we were founded mainly by fire brand Puritans.


28 posted on 05/25/2014 12:23:08 PM PDT by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

“It does seem that the countries that went Protestant were far more economically successful than the ones that stayed Catholic.”

Except for 16th century Spain which was the largest, richest and most powerful country in the world.


29 posted on 05/25/2014 12:23:33 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“I’ll agree that the Reformation was an imperfect start.”

Its end is no better either: atheism, communism, hedonism, skepticism, utilitarianism, totalitarianism.
.............
Yeah I’ve seen catholics on other forums make this charge. While a satisfying charge to make—it doesn’t properly connect cause and effect. The cause for the ugly stuff above is a by product of the scientific revolution—which began in with the introduction of greek ideas by way of the Renaissance. The principal Greek idea here is that “Man is the Measure of all things.” This — taken to its logical conclusion — would include God. Naturally if you can measure God, then he is not God. If he is not God—then all the laws and structures related to him are built on fantasies. Therefor you get all the ugly stuff above. etc.

St Paul’s most spectacular failure was in his serman on Mars Hill in Athens to Greek Epicureans and Stoics. Why? because he tried to fit his words into the the architecture of Greek Philosophical thinking. Which began with the premise. “Man is the measure of all things.”

By contrast—Jewish/Christian theology begins with the premise that God is the measure of all things.

The shorthand here is that that philsophy is man centered bottoms up reasoning whereas theology is God Centered top down reasoning. Confuse the two and there’s hell to pay.


30 posted on 05/25/2014 12:27:47 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“Except for 16th century Spain which was the largest, richest and most powerful country in the world.”

Until that Armada thing.

Had to say it.


31 posted on 05/25/2014 12:31:16 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore
Hooray for Henry's Church of England.
It now allows homosexual marriages.

How sweet. King Henry would be so very pleased.

32 posted on 05/25/2014 12:31:26 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Spain got wealthy (for a while) off the back of having a huge Empire filled with bountious raw resources, especially silver. However, simply digging wealth out of the ground doesn’t advance a nation socially or provide a lasting basis for wealth creation or industry, the real drivers behind a truly great power. In the end, Spain got lazy and left in the dust as its industrialising neighbours, especially England, unhampered by prohibitions against usury and encouraged to believe that wealth created through hard work was a sign of God’s blessing, developed superior technology and a more advanced political and social mindset, which encouraged the lower orders to feel that they had a stake in the nation they belonged to, not just the perennially abusive and exploitative landed aristocracy as was the case in Spain.


33 posted on 05/25/2014 12:38:08 PM PDT by sinsofsolarempirefan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

“Henry Fitzroy, 17.”

Yes, that’s the fellow. Only 17, how did he die? Natural causes?

I mean you really could die of just about anything in those days. That was one sad bit in the first book, Cromwell’s beloved wife is felled by “the sweat”. One day you are fine, next morning you are sick and by the end of that day you are dead. Or so it was in the book, and I did google it since I’d never heard of it, but nobody seems to know too much about what it actually was or why we don’t get that anymore. I mean even with the plague people lingered and even some recovered. I suppose some with the sweat recovered too, but still, awful that young, healthy people are struck down like that. The Spanish Flu did that too, but I can’t think of anything more recent than that.

I wondered if you would say something about our own time becoming fraught with peril, I was thinking that too.

I’m in my mid-50s, I don’t really think I’ll live to see it. But I think this country, and world, are definitely cruising for a bruising.


34 posted on 05/25/2014 12:38:55 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Their marriage was probably “cursed” with an STD that Katherine picked up from the philandering Henry.


35 posted on 05/25/2014 12:39:30 PM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore
That is not to say everyone loved the Church. By the time Cromwell was sharpening his pen to gut the monasteries more thoroughly than the Vikings ever had,

Lust and Greed caused the English to start the Church of England.

36 posted on 05/25/2014 12:42:12 PM PDT by af_vet_1981 (The bus came by and I got on, That's when it all began)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore; metmom; daniel1212; Elsie; Alex Murphy; boatbums; xzins; ...
Recently the FRoman Catholics made the claim that Satanists co-oping their trinkets was proof that Rome is the true religion.

Now we see an attack on Protestants by a Godless secular press outlet.

Let's just sit back and see if the FRoman Catholic contingent can connect the dots here or if they will be inconsistent in their analysis. <crickets>

37 posted on 05/25/2014 12:46:25 PM PDT by Gamecock (#BringTheAdultsBackToDC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

History Ping


38 posted on 05/25/2014 12:47:11 PM PDT by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

You seem from here, and other threads I have seen you on, to have a real visceral hate for Protestants. I assume you live in the US, a country whose ideals are strictly routed in the Protestant world. It must tear at your soul to walk the very earth that became the greatest nation on Earth, founded by our Protestant Founding Fathers, who were born from the bosom of the Protestant Anglosphere. I assume you prefer to live under a Absolutist Catholic monarch in the order of a Bourbon or Habsburg than the Constitutional Republic created by Madison,Washington, Jefferson, etc, Protestansts all. You strike me as someone who is anti-American to his core, in the same way the corrupt absolutist monarchs of early 19th Century Europe despised the United States. If you despise the Protestant world so much, I suggest you move south of the Rio Grande and find solace with those more like minded.


39 posted on 05/25/2014 12:52:34 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister

I wonder what things would have been like if in fact Calvinists had been less fanatical. It was after the Restoration that Puritanism became a persecuted doctrine and thankfully we now live in a time when we don’t live in a society that forbids having a good time.
/////////////
The losers of the 17th century wars in Europe were the calvinists. They all migrated to America. At the time of the Revolution the Calvinists were the majority in the US population. (they quickly declined) Author of the US constitution and the federalists papers was James Madison—who was a thorough going Calvinist. The great contribution of the american constitution to the world is that it places checks and balances and limits on government—because as all Calvinists know — all men and women are naturally evil—including the bosses. And without constraints on their power—they will naturally run amok.


40 posted on 05/25/2014 12:55:30 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore

This man is sooo full of himself he can hardly stand it.

Note that this guy has strong ties to Dubai and other middle eastern nations. Most of what he writes is not ‘new’ nor particularly insightful. More of what he writes is absolute nonsense


41 posted on 05/25/2014 12:59:22 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore; dcwusmc; Jed Eckert; Recovering Ex-hippie; KingOfVagabonds; ...

For decades now historians - Catholic, Protestant and those of no particular belief - have admitted that the story of the Protestant Reformation in England is little more than a constructed fraud.

Eamon Duffy showed that to be the case, conclusively, many years ago: http://www.amazon.com/The-Stripping-Altars-Traditional-1400-1580/dp/0300108281

http://www.amazon.com/Marking-Hours-English-Prayers-1240-1570/dp/0300170580/ref=pd_sim_b_4?ie=UTF8&refRID=1JES9F0P42F1BSXPVJ21

http://www.amazon.com/Voices-Morebath-Reformation-Rebellion-English/dp/0300098251/ref=la_B001H6KLJG_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401041128&sr=1-2

http://www.amazon.com/Saints-Sacrilege-Sedition-Religion-Reformations/dp/1441181172/ref=la_B001H6KLJG_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401041128&sr=1-5

http://www.amazon.com/Fires-Faith-Catholic-England-under/dp/0300168896/ref=la_B001H6KLJG_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401041128&sr=1-4


42 posted on 05/25/2014 1:01:29 PM PDT by narses (Matthew 7:6. He appears to have made up his mind let him live with the consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinsofsolarempirefan

Spain got wealthy (for a while) off the back of having a huge Empire filled with bountious raw resources, especially silver.
..........
There was a really interesting story about that published on free republic about a year ago. The spanish galleons returning returning to spain after 1562 or so returned loaded with silver pieces of eight minted in the new world. This silver didn’t come from the Aztecs of the Incas but rather from some giant mines in Mexico and Peru. What’s more the silver from these mines had been inaccessable until about 1562—because the silver was locked in formations unfamiliar to european miners at the time. Somebody figured out how to extract the silver and and they drowned Spain in silver for two centuries. Spain spread the silver around to all of europe and the new world. The reason for the great tulip speculative bubble of the early 1600’s was that there was too much spanish silver mined in the new world— floating around. Up until at least 1750 the spanish pieces of eight were recognized currency in the american colonies.


43 posted on 05/25/2014 1:03:34 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: narses

I’m sure someone named Eamon Duffy would have no axe to grind.


44 posted on 05/25/2014 1:04:27 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

“Yeah I’ve seen catholics on other forums make this charge. While a satisfying charge to make—it doesn’t properly connect cause and effect.”

Ultimately it does. It’s just very difficult to document such cause and effect because you’re talking about ideological movements rather than simple events.


45 posted on 05/25/2014 1:07:23 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: jocon307

“Until that Armada thing.”

Even after the “Armada thing” Spain was “the largest, richest and most powerful country in the world.”

Had to say it.


46 posted on 05/25/2014 1:11:40 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Campion

“Their marriage was probably “cursed” with an STD that Katherine picked up from the philandering Henry.”

There is certainly reason to believe that.


47 posted on 05/25/2014 1:13:21 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Not gonna take it anymore
Very long indeed.

You could draw a parallel with the French Revolution (or with England's Cromwellian Revolution). Arguably, because these countries cut off their king's head in the 18th (or 17th century) they did go through the ordeals that countries like Spain or Germany or Russia or China or Japan would go through in the 20th century.

That doesn't mean that everything that happened in those earlier revolutions (or the Reformation) was right, or that the myths people have told themselves since are true. It may not mean that such processes were worthwhile. But some rebellion, some unruly behavior earlier, can spare you greater upheavals later, and may even prepare the ground for a modern constitutional democratic political order.

48 posted on 05/25/2014 1:19:14 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

and why was Spain the ‘largest, richest’ country at that time? could it have more to do with the confiscation of the amassed wealth of their Moors and Jews, or more to do with internal industriousness?


49 posted on 05/25/2014 1:20:37 PM PDT by blueplum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981

“Lust and Greed caused the English to start the Church of England. “

perhaps....and the desire to not be overrun by Spain whom Rome favored so that it could maintain it’s geopolitical holdings.

In that day, one could not separate Rome, the political center of the world, and Rome the religious seat of Christianity.

The corruption of politics also corrupted the religion.

Ultimately the COE replicated the religious part, but made the political part Anglocentric. To this day many COE-derived religious ceremonies are very similar to Catholic ceremonies. Not so for most other Protestant sects.

Imagine the present cesspool in Washington in charge of our religious beliefs?

No, Henry did what was best for England at the time. Part of that meant that Rome had to lose control of religion in England.


50 posted on 05/25/2014 1:21:34 PM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-174 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson