I have been reading through “Bishop Overall’s Convocation Book - Government of Catholic Church and Kingdoms (1606)” which is linked on this forum. In my opinion, and based on the book, it seems that one of the fundamental, if not the fundamental difference between the Anglican Church and the Roman Catholic Church is the different view on government both Ecclesiastical and Temporal. My summary of the difference is this, The Convocation Book takes the stance that in the hierarchy of Government the temporal king is over the church in authority and therefore is justified in selecting, and deposing, Bishops and other Ecclesiastical authorities. This differs from the Roman Catholic view which places the Pope above kings and other temporal rulers in the hierarchy of Government, which in effect makes the Pope into a temporal ruler himself as he selects and deposes kings and other rulers. It seems that a consistent criticism of the Pope at that time was his usurping the role of a temporal ruler. Also, the Anglican view justifies King Henry VIII in his break from the Pope as he was essentially choosing his Bishops who would ecclesiastically rule over his people, and was only performing his duty in doing so. Thoughts on this? I know that both these views on Government clash with the modern view of Liberalism but for Elizabethan England (and probably most of Christian history) these were major issues. Understanding the difference between the Anglican Church and the RC Church in this way also makes the divide more governmental in nature instead of theological, which should lessen the emphasis or division between “Protestant” Anglicans vs. “Anglo-Catholics”. Anyways, I would love to hear what you all think on this.