The Catholic Church has faced many conflicts throughout its long history. Its stance on controversial issues and firm beliefs on the word of God have shaped the world to be the way it is today. Many religions have stemmed from Catholicism due to these differences and conflicts. One religion, in particular, is the Church of England. In the sixteenth century, King Henry VIII’s struggle with the Catholic Church provides a prime example of the conflicts the Catholic Church faced. The King wished to divorce his wife and asked the Church to recognize the divorce. Henry believed he deserved an exemption, however, the Church was strongly committed to their strict interpretations of the word of God. Multiple passages exist in the Bible that address the issue of divorce. In the disagreement between King Henry VIII and the Catholic Church, the passage from Mark 10:1-12 was extremely influential. This paper discusses how the rhetoric of Mark 10:1-12 could leave room for an interpretation varied enough that King Henry VIII could believe God allowed divorce, while the Catholic Church could believe God forbids it.
During his reign, King Henry VIII experienced numerous conflicts with the Catholic Church. The main issue, however, was that the Church would not allow him to divorce his first wife. The King believed that because his wife could not bear him a son and because he was the King of England, he deserved an exemption. The Church, however, believed that the Bible was clear: God forbids divorce. Because the King was not granted an exception to the rule of divorce he broke away from the Catholic Church and created the Church of England.
The Church’s main strategy against King Henry VIII was the persuasive rhetoric of the Bible. The main priority of the Catholic Church is to follow God’s word without question, to remain close to God, and to remain strong in faith. The rhetoric of the Bible is extremely influential and purposefully formulated to ensure its readers do not try to question its authority. Bradford E. Hinze writes the Bible’s rhetorical strategy is explained as it, “often explores how rhetorical concerns influence smaller units of argumentation, but it sometimes also suggests how these concerns drive selections from among wider genre options.” The “rhetorical concerns” of this time was about Mark 10:1-12.
Described in Reclaiming Rhetoric in the Christian Tradition, understanding the rhetoric of the Bible requires an understanding of biblical traditions and their interpretations. In the words of Hinze, “each approach [of understanding Biblical rhetoric] casts light on a facet of the communal process of tradition.” Biblical interpretation has evolved as our knowledge of the traditions common at the time the Bible was written evolve. Theologians argue over how the passages should be interpreted and where the emphasis should be placed based on the issues and injustices of the time. Because the Bible is an ancient text and has been studied for thousands of years issues have fallen in and out of relevance. For example, in early history, an extremely large conflict with the Catholic Church was the sale of indulgences. In modern times, indulgences are not discussed; instead, issues such as abortion and homosexuality are much more prevalent. The issue of the period at hand is divorce and the Biblical passage, in particular, that was analyzed is Mark 10:1-12.
In the New Testament passage Mark 10:1-12, Jesus explains the wrongfulness of divorce. He explained, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.” The Catholic Church carries the belief that divorce is wrong and in no way supports the act. On the other hand, King Henry did not interpret the Bible literally and believed, because of his status as King, he deserved an exemption. Bradford E. Hinze claims that rhetoric aims to “include the social, cultural, and communicative milieu as well as the textual environment.” The study of the passage from Mark’s Gospel has an interesting approach because it explains the teacher-student relationship with Jesus and His disciples. Jesus held His Disciples accountable to remember basic information and to write it in a persuasive manner. Jesus wanted their answers to be “based on inference or interpretation.” This was very helpful to the disciples when they began to write because it gave them a further understanding of what needed to be said and in what way. They also began to gain a sense of the purpose behind God’s word combined with Jesus actions.
Mark’s divorce passage in the Bible extends to discipleship, “Jesus called his followers to a complete acceptance of their mission just as he himself had accepted the cross.” Due to Jesus’ wonderful teaching on how to express his message clearly so the readers can understand its purpose, the Catholic Church had a strong foundation with regard to its’ argument. This strong, persuasive, and unquestionable rhetoric heavily dictates why King Henry VIII could not win the argument by utilizing a favorable analysis of the text, ultimately leading to his exit from the Catholic Church.
King Henry VIII was very bold to question the authority of the Pope with regard to the issue of the legitimacy of his marriage. Many sovereign leaders have experienced a power struggle with Church leaders, especially the papacy. Catholic teachings, in particular the prayers of intercession, serve to increase “awareness of the Pope’s position of primacy” which was also “reinforced by commentaries on the Ten Commandments, which ranked him first in the requirement to honour your (spiritual) father and mother.” Clearly, the rhetoric of Catholic teachings establishes the Pope as the head of the Church from no less an authority than the Ten Commandments. However, conflicts stemmed not from the rejection of God’s word but from the issue of primacy: who will have authority over the people. Kings in the Middle and Modern Ages believed in their divine right as King and by extension, a superior relationship with God that could not be preempted by any other person, not even the Pope. As stated by a noted historian, “One layman in particular-the King-had a pronounced interest in the power of the Pope, and in how it might strengthen, sanctify or subvert the sinews of his own authority”
King Henry struggled with the papacy because he refused to let go of the belief that his authority originates from divine right. In a speech at Baynard’s Castle, Henry VIII stated, “By the ordinance and sufferance of God we are King of England, and the Kings of England in time past have never had any superior but God alone.” Various English Reformers were able to identify the political and theological differences of power between the Church and the King; however, “they were unable to persuade King Henry VIII, who remained incorrigibly attached to the old practices.” King Henry’s struggle with the Church reflected his commitment to his own supremacy instead of recognizing God, the Pope and the magisterium of the Church as the important religious authorities that enforce His word.
In conclusion, the rhetoric of the Bible is subject to interpretation as times change and different issues become more relevant. However, one needs to rely on proper Church authorities along with the teachings and example of Jesus Christ, for correct guidance. A key example can be found in the rhetoric that surrounded the “Great Matter”: the controversy over the divorce of King Henry VIII. The argument over the practical application of a passage from the Bible, followed by the prohibition of divorce ultimately led Henry to question the authority of the Pope himself. Rejection of papal authority by sovereigns such as Henry VIII occurred because they believe their authority originates from divine right and cannot be superseded. Rhetoric, in particular that which applies to the gospel, must remain true to its divine Author.