GENBRIT-L ArchivesArchiver > GENBRIT > 2005-07 > 1121705594
From: Don Aitken <>
Subject: Re: Bigamy
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 17:53:14 +0100
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20050718154733.371AB8BCD30@smtp2.freeola.net>
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 15:41:51 +0000 (UTC), ("Roy
>> From: (cecilia)
>> One might consider Henry VIII's views on the legitimacy of his daughter
>> Mary as he renounced his marriage to Katharine of Aragon. >
>Henry VIII altered his views to suit his circumstances!
>His argument to the Pope that his marriage to Catherine of Aragon
>was invalid was on the basis that he had married his deceased
>brother's wife. However, when he wanted to marry Anne Boleyn he
>conveniently forgot that he had had a relationship (and, it is said,
>two children) with her elder sister Mary, and so his marriage to Anne
>was also illegal under canon law.
>The Pope had given a dispensation in the first case but wouldn't in
>the second, which was why Henry split with Rome - a fact for which we
>should all be very grateful, since it hastened the arrival of parish
>registers in 1538.
Actually the Pope *did* grant the second dispensation, removing all
impediments to the marriage arising from Henry's relationship with
Mary Boleyn. This was part of the process of stringing Henry along,
which want on for years, and was obviously of no practical use to him
without the anullment of his existing marriage. The dispensation was
so worded as to cover either sexual relations or a promise of
marriage, or both. I think the two children are mythical, though.
The arguments used on both sides in this controversy reached great
heights of complication. Henry's answer to the apparent contradiction
was that the impediment in the case of Mary was merely "human law",
and hence could be dispensed with, while that in the case of Catherine
was "God's law", as expressed in Leviticus, and could not.
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"
|Re: Bigamy by Don Aitken <>|