Most people think Henry VIII married so many wives because he was promiscuous. He enjoyed the royal prerogative of having mistresses, so marriage was another issue.
His sickly brother married Katherine of Aragon (Spain) and died. After many complications, Henry married his brother's widow. The issue then and later was - did the brother consummate the marriage?
Henry and Katherine had only one surviving child, Mary, later known as Bloody Mary, for her habit of executing Protestant martyrs.
Henry and Katherine probably had the rH factor problem, which meant later children had little chance of surviving. (My parents had the same problem, but had four unusually healthy children.)
Henry became convinced that God cursed him for incest. Today he could have transferred to the CLC (sic), but there was only one church at that time. Henry appealed to Rome, and Anne Boleyn appealed to him. She was attractive, vivacious and intelligent.
Henry finally divorced Katherine, a long and painful matter, made more difficult by the pope's weakness and Katherine's nephew Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor. Some readers will remember Charles V from the Reformation - he stood over Luther's grave but refused to dig up the Reformer. "My battle is with the living, not with the dead."
Queen Elizabeth's Mother, Anne
Henry's split from Rome was facilitated by his second wife, Anne, who enjoyed reading Protestant books so she had Henry study them as well. Anne became a horrible shrew, and many factions lined up against her. Anne's only surviving child was Elizabeth, of later fame. The lack of a male heir made it easy to manufacture a case of adultery against her. Anne was executed.
Henry finally did have a son, Edward, who became a Protestant king for a short time.
A ruthless nobleman tried to have Lady Jane Grey become queen, so he could rule through the teen-aged queen.
Mary replaced Lady Jane, who was executed after only nine days. However, Mary was not healthy and died relatively young, allowing Elizabeth to rule as a Protestant.
Henry's quest for a wife was motivated by his fear of another War of the Roses, which his father won. Henry VII, Henry VIII, Edward VI, (Lady Jane), Mary, and Elizabeth were the only Tudor rulers.
Stuart Monarchs - Indelible Bad Impression - Click here for a link to the list.
Next came James I of Scotland, the first Stuart king, related to Henry VIII through Henry's sister. The Stuart monarchs were: James I (of Bible fame), Charles I (executed), Charles II (restored), James II (overthrown by the bloodless revolution, William and Mary), and finally Queen Anne.
The Stuart kings "left an indelible bad impression on England." All of the men were secret Roman Catholics, so they favored Rome while oppressing the Protestants. Their dishonesty led to waves of migrations to America, in search of religious freedom. The original concept of a Christian nation with no religious test for politicians came from our Founders' experiences with the English situation.
B-16
Pope Benedict has created a furor by offering to accept British Anglicans and American Episcopalians into the priesthood, wives and titles and all. Traditionalist Episcopalians, like Gaylin Schmeling's professor at Nashotah House, have longed for reunion with Rome. Now they have that possibility, and the terms are not too onerous.
This link has a good article on Benedict's diplomacy.
Krauth on Anglicans
"Its Articles, Homilies, and Liturgy have been a great bulwark of Protestantism; and yet, seemingly, out of the very stones of that bulwark has been framed, in our day, a bridge on which many have passed over into Rome...It harbors a skepticism which takes infidelity by the hand, and a revised medievalism which longs to throw itself, with tears, on the neck of the Pope and the Patriarch, to beseech them to be gentle and not to make the terms of restored fellowship too difficult." Charles P. Krauth---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "King Henry VII, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth I and ...":
It amazes me how you can find ways to attack people/groups that are not really related to your post. Seriously, what is the point in that? Are you implying that the CLC is incestuous? If so can you offer proof? Or is this an attempt at humor?
Also, what does the fact that Pres. Schmeling went to an Episcopal school have to do with this post (especially considering that he went for an STM in "History of Dogma," instead of doctrine)? You went to Notre Dame and Yale. Those aren't exactly orthodox schools either.
-Anonymous because I don't have an identity affiliated with the blogosphere.
***
GJ - Why is a simple fact about Gaylin Schmeling an attack? I quoted one of his professors, Charlie Caldwell, a good friend of mine at Notre Dame. Most people do not know Charlie, so I mentioned Gaylin. Schmeling was passed over for a position at Bethany because he did not have a graduate degree, so he got an STM at Nashotah House. The same rule was not applied to Moldstad, who became a Bethany Seminary Professor of New Testament without a college degree. There was a hub-bub about that, so Moldstad finished one up. Gone are the days when Chemnitz, as a bishop, was required to earn a PhD in theology.
Ask the Pancake Pope about incest in the CLC (sic). Perhaps the anonymous person could ask for anonymous DNA from the people involved.
I drop in various comments to wake up the snoozing Pietists, who are always ready to accuse...anonymously. One WELS pastor said this, "Everything I could verify has been shown to be true." I would name him, but that would tilt the playing field, not exactly fair.
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "King Henry VII, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth I and ...":
"The Stuart monarchs were: James I (of Bible fame), Charles I (executed), Charles II (restored), James II (overthrown by the bloodless revolution, William and Mary)."
Don't forget Queen Anne!
"Their dishonesty led to waves of migrations to America, in search of religious freedom."
Those religious emigrations from England deserve some context. The Puritans/non-conformists did constitute something of a political threat, even unto regicide as England would discover, and so intolerance was only a matter of course. And then theologically, the Puritans' largely Calvinistic leanings were nothing to applaud.
"All of the men were secret Roman Catholics, so they favored Rome while oppressing the Protestants."
James II was avowedly Catholic, of course, but he was hardly oppressive. Foolish, certainly. He was expelled for advocating too vehemently Catholic toleration, but again, nothing he did was particularly oppressive against Protestants in England. In fact, his attempts to introduce toleration applied also to non-conformists, which didn't sit well with Church of England divines.
-DJJ
***
GJ - Good points by DJJ.
