Terraius wrote:Cybach wrote:
Yeah. I have no idea why so many people hold the disillusion that Anglicans are Protestants. For lack of a better term I would consider them "Canterbury" Catholics in contrast to the "Roman" Catholics. The split seems entirely political and less theological.
Anglicans have over time come to differ on theological doctrine, and therefore are heretics and not just another label of Catholicism. But yes, when it first happened, it was purely political, nothing more. When a church decides to give up central authority on doctrinal issues you tend to see doctrine start to waver, as is between Protestants, and in some cases, Orthodoxy.
Actually, you could argue the split from Rome was inevitable. As far back as the Saxon times the English church was in conflict with the Pope. William the Conquerer's invasion was a Papal sanctioned crusade, after all. And protestantism was the last of several sects to spring up during the middle ages. If the Pope wasn't
a) too obsessed with Jerusalem
b) too busy with conflicts (the avignon-rome split)
c) too corrupt (relics, payment to get into heaven, corrupt monks and priests, etc.)
Protestantism would have gone the way of Catharism.


