I do not recall seeing it, but I think it communicates the wrong message.  It supports the idea that Anglicanism's founder was HenryVIII.   It was Jesus Christ, and the saints who followed Jesus Christ, who first brought the gospel to England.

Henry's divorce was not the cause of the break between Rome and Canterbury, but rather the occasion.

Things were breaking apart beween Rome and London for decades if not for centuries before Henry VIII.

I liked the Tudors. Part of the reason for Henry's transgressions was that he was ignorant about what determines the sex of the child. I bet if he knew that it was the man that carries the determining X and Y chromosome he probably wouldn't have done that. And I'm also willing to bet that England would have broke off with Rome regardless.

Apr 28, 2012 -- 4:51PM, Roodog wrote:

Henry's divorce was not the cause of the break between Rome and Canterbury, but rather the occasion.

Things were breaking apart beween Rome and London for decades if not for centuries before Henry VIII.

Roodog, you have stated the situation perfectly.  The divorce was the occasion of the break, not the reason.

I'm slogging through an excellent biography of Cranmer now.  It details Cranmer's path from slavish papist during his years at Cambridge to avid reformer as priest and bishop.  (He actually got married while still a Roman priest and before the split.) Long before the issue of divorce arose, Cranmer, while at Cambridge, had been in conversation with Protestant divines in Europe on the key elements of docrtinal reform, as well as with reformists at Cambridge.  Initially, he was very much in the papal anti-annulment/divorce camp, but by the time he was appointed to study and document grounds for divorce or annulment, he and many other bishops and priests in the English Church were pushing for a break from Rome.

Here is a link to the biography. Extremely detailed, chocked through and through with minutia of his life.

www.amazon.com/Thomas-Cranmer-Dr-Diarmai...

Jim

Apr 28, 2012 -- 6:57PM, Spokang wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 4:51PM, Roodog wrote:

Henry's divorce was not the cause of the break between Rome and Canterbury, but rather the occasion.

Things were breaking apart beween Rome and London for decades if not for centuries before Henry VIII.

Roodog, you have stated the situation perfectly.  The divorce was the occasion of the break, not the reason.

I'm slogging through an excellent biography of Cranmer now.  It details Cranmer's path from slavish papist during his years at Cambridge to avid reformer as priest and bishop.  (He actually got married while still a Roman priest and before the split.) Long before the issue of divorce arose, Cranmer, while at Cambridge, had been in conversation with Protestant divines in Europe on the key elements of docrtinal reform, as well as with reformists at Cambridge.  Initially, he was very much in the papal anti-annulment/divorce camp, but by the time he was appointed to study and document grounds for divorce or annulment, he and many other bishops and priests in the English Church were pushing for a break from Rome.

Here is a link to the biography. Extremely detailed, chocked through and through with minutia of his life.

www.amazon.com/Thomas-Cranmer-Dr-Diarmai...

Jim

The English Crown and the Papacy had been feuding since the turn of the 14th Century when Edward Longshanks and Boniface VIII were giving each other the finger some 250 years before their "divorce".