I immediately sent an acknowledgement--"typo: Reformation." Did it not
>>> [log in to unmask] 11/08/04 3:52 AM >>>
I suspect you mean Henry VIII.
What would Jennifer say?
I shudder to think.
From: Nancy Gish
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 2004-Nov-07 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: Reformation
I just watched the first half of the BBC "Henry VII" before checking
this, and with all acknowledgement of film and dramatic choices, was it
really "honor" Henry was engaged in or even the church as a motive?
>>> [log in to unmask] 11/07/04 9:24 PM >>>
With all due respect,
> As I remember it, he placed all his chips on Launcelot as the
> founder/extablisher or
> the Anglican Church.
The correct spelling is Lancelot Andrewes, not Launcelot. Nor do I
think Eliot would grudge Henry his crown, or Andrewes his bishops hat
by even, by ever, implying that Andrewes (1555-1626) _founded or
established_ the Anglican Church. I believe that honour correctly
belongs to King Henry VIII, the instigator of the Reformation.
What Eliot comments on in his essay 'Lancelot Andrewes' (1927) , which
is different from the 1928 book, _For Lancelot Andrewes: Essays on
Style and Order_, is Andrewes role in creating the language of
Anglicanism. Andrewes was, Eliot notes, one of the great sermon
writers; and more essentially, one of the translators of the King James
Incidentally, Eliot's epigraph to _For Lancelot Andrewes_ , is to my
mind one of his most beautiful.