Henry8 was self-conscious about preserving the Tudor dynasty, which had ended a century-long civil war. He was fairly pious & believed his lack of a son was a curse for violating Leviticus (marrying his brother's widow, which the pope allowed). Divorce was synonym for annulment.
However Catherine's uncle was Charles5, who had just sieged/arrested the Pope (Clement7). Pope's recommendation was for Henry to simply take Anne as a concubine, adopting one of his bastards. But Henry saw this as a recipe for chaos. Here enter Evangelicals.
The men of the "Little Germany" circle began to circulate Luther's works. They were also Renaissance men & congenial to the recently defeated conciliarist movement. It was not the pope's absolute right to determine political or canonical matters.
Additionally, there was a wider frustration with clerical corruption in England. This was not anti-Catholic, but a desire for moral reform. Monastics owned 20-25% of the land in England & were exempt from taxes, & did not always behave well.
'Praemunire' already existed on statute books to take church-land, in past struggles between king & pope/church (ie Thomas a Beckett). Henry8 warmed to the idea that as a godly king, like David, he had a right to protect the sanctity of his realm. Thus the Reformation parliament.
Henry8, however, was never a Protestant (literature refers to his theology as 'Conservative', like Stephen Gardner), remaining Roman Catholic, but refusing the ecclesiastical idea that the pope was the head of the English church. Thus the 'separation' began, in a canonical sense.
However, Evangelicals had already begun to spread (dovetailing with the remnants of Lollardy in the East). There was an increasingly vocal cry to not only canonically separate, but to cleanse the teaching of the church. Following this, Henry8 acknowledged the 10 Articles.
But Henry8's concern to maintain the realm (& see-saw between France & HRE) frustrated these efforts. The Pilgrimage of Grace was ruthlessly put down & Henry would execute Papalists as traitors. But he also resisted a Lutheran alliance, putting to death Evangelicals as heretics.
The 6 Articles was then the official compromise, which reestablished Catholic doctrine, but maintained canonical separation. However, with Henry8's death, the Evangelicals hidden in the wings came to power with Edward6 & Lord-Protector Somerset, who were both Evangelical.
With Edward6 & Archbishop Cranmer, the English Church adopted Reformation theology (in 42 articles & the first Book of Common Prayer). But heavy-handed reforms & the death of the young king saw the revival of Catholicism in Mary Tudor, Stephen Gardner, & Reginald Pole.
However, even though Mary's reign easily overcame a Prot putsch (with Lady Jane Gray), she could not reestablish the old ways. Pole (who was almost pope) was not averse to Luther's sola fide, & many of the gentry who benefited from monastic land did not want to return it.
Thus Mary burnt about 400 Evangelicals, & reestablished connection with Rome, but did not wholly repudiate her father's authority over the church. Her reign sent many Evangelicals abroad into exile, many of whom preserved the unique English form of Reformation.
With Mary's untimely death saw the rise of Elizabeth1, who restored the Edwardian standard in 1559. The Evangelicals from abroad were awarded bishoprics, though some had adopted new methods from Geneva. With Elizabeth, the Church of England was able to reach an equilibrium.
In short: Evangelicals had both guided (& suffered) Henry8's reign, but ultimately succeeded through persistence & suffering. Henry8 did not create the Church of England, anymore than Constantine created Nicaean Christianity, they were influential means for broader changes.
Addendum: institutionally the Church of England was canonically modified (eg Canterbury & York were unified as a single national church), but much of it remained untouched (to the ire of some precisionists). Thus it was a "reform", not the invention of something new.
However, part of this reform was forming, exactly, what continuity was. John Foxe's Memorial saw connection between early English Christianity through Lollardy against Roman intrusions. Accuracy notwithstanding, even a puritan like Foxe saw a history lineage across time. fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
To clarify Zwingli's insight & make broader concerns about Eucharist: it's not that Zwingli was the first to connect Eucharist to Pascha, it was that the Eucharist was to be understood viz. Pascha, ie it was a meal that transformed the partakers, & less about the elements.
This insight was a reversal of Thomas Aquinas' judgement that the NT sacraments were self-operative (unlike the OT which required faith to work). Therefore Zwingli shifted the focus away from what happens to bread/wine to what happens to the church & rejected OT/NT difference.
Zwingli was unclear how this happened, & used "sacramental presence" as fuzzy signifier. Calvin rebuked this for a "spiritual presence", where the Holy Spirit mediates the boons of Christ through *faith*. Thus Calvin (& Reformed generally) absorbed Zwingli's most important shift.
Assessment from 70s that Swedish Social Democracy was the most totalitarian form of polity. Seems excessive, but a necessary opening.
Huntford makes a conjecture that it's because Sweden skipped feudalism, opting for centralization earlier on, that it was culturally prime for SocDem take over. It's an outsider's POV, but will investigate.
Sweden's earlier tradition of free-farming saw growth of wealth & trust in local communitarian governments (overseen by Lutheran pastors). This was then mutated into the State as "the Greater Family" under a mandate of "biopolitics". The Polis is confused with the Oikos.
It's unstated how important polemics were to theological debate. The fear of appearing to be on the side of heretic X led to fairly ruthless changes in what was permissible to say. Here are some patristic examples:
The early Christians called themselves Gnostics because the Lordship of Christ is "saving knowledge of the truth". But the refitting of this term by smaller sects, who claimed truer saving knowledge, led to condemnation of "so-called gnostics", blackening the concept.
It was an early tradition to emphasize the strict divinity of Christ. But Paul of Samosata's monarchism (oneness of God) & Two Sons (Christ-God & Jesus-Man are two distinct subjects) led to emphasizing the distinction of the Son of God from the Father.