SINCE Mr Lynch (LET, January 7) seems to be so ready to pounce on those he feels have made mistakes in their letters, I feel it only fair that I must in turn correct what he argued in his letter recently.

Although his lovely fairytale story of nasty King Henry tearing down monasteries and threatening his population makes an enjoyable read, it is not true.

I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but the truth was that Henry was a pious King and had done much to protect the Catholic Church up until this point. Although he did desire a divorce from his first wife, this was not to be the sole reason for the break from Rome.

One of the biggest factors that led to the split was the same in England as on the continent; the Catholic Church was simply too corrupt. The clergy benefited far too much from their position; the position held by the Pope from the Middle Ages until the Reformation was largely a corrupt political one.

Henry remained accommodating towards Catholics in the later years of his reign and the number of people actually killed for remaining Catholic was small, certainly lower than the amount of Protestants executed under the Catholic Queen Mary.

The Catholic Church acknowledged in the creed refers to universal Christianity, not the Roman Catholic Church!

Christianity is built on a principle of tolerance and acceptance, yet Mr Lynch seems to find it acceptable that the Roman Catholic Church was responsible for the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition, but heaven forbid that a King should want a divorce!

The Church of England preaches the word of God as it interprets it.

As a Catholic I thought I might point out these oversights.

(Name and address supplied)