• Next message: Hardy M. Cook: "Untouchable Shakespeare"
• Previous message: Hardy M. Cook: "Regarding Merchant Articles in Relarts"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0189  Friday, 28 March 2008

[1] 	From:	Nicole Coonradt <nmcoonradt@comcast.net>
	Date:	Thursday, 13 Mar 2008 17:58:55 +0000
	Subj:	Re: SHK 19.0171 EMLS 13.3 Now Available

[2] 	From:	Carol Barton <cbartonphd1@verizon.net>
	Date:	Thursday, 13 Mar 2008 20:27:04 -0400
	Subj:	Re: SHK 19.0171 EMLS 13.3 Now Available


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:		Nicole Coonradt <nmcoonradt@comcast.net>
Date:		Thursday, 13 Mar 2008 17:58:55 +0000
Subject: 19.0171 EMLS 13.3 Now Available
Comment:	Re: SHK 19.0171 EMLS 13.3 Now Available

Thank you both for the clarification, and nothing too picky about it, 
Don. It was Charles I's marriage to Spanish princess Henrietta Maria, a 
Catholic, that did rightly make the Protestants fear for their faith as 
the official state religion. The problem, however, after Charles I was 
executed was that his young son, Charles II, was to succeed to the 
throne, but as Parliament made this illegal, the country was thrown into 
the Interregnum. Thereafter, when Charles II was finally accepted as 
king (in 1661 when he was but 14), the boy, as noted, was not at that 
time Catholic, though he had secretly agreed to join the Church at a 
later time, not actually converting until his deathbed (there are rumors 
that Elizabeth I did this as well). Charles II both supported and pushed 
for toleration, note the "Declaration of Indulgence," which Parliament 
would not accept. I also refer members to Titus Oates' "Popish Plot" 
tracts-- discussed by Marotti (whose salient study I noted in a previous 
post)-- that served to intensify anti-Catholic sentiment in England. The 
Glorious Revolution saw the official end to any future hope of a 
Catholic ever becoming a monarch in England. Charles II's brother, James 
II, had not been favored for the monarchy because of his Catholic ties, 
though he too favored toleration. James II had been baptized and raised 
Anglican and did not convert (accounts vary) until about 1669, though he 
did not openly declare his faith until late in the 1670s retaining close 
ties to Anglican leadership.

About that time, the Test Act (1673) forced all civic and military 
officers to renounce the beliefs most dear to Catholics, just as Oaths 
and Acts had forced English subjects to do since Henry VIII's Reforms 
began in England (with the exception of the brief period of Marian 
retractions-- at which point Protestants were under fire). James II own 
short rule was 1685-88. So he obviously was Catholic, rather than his 
two predecessors who were not officially Catholic and whom I had instead 
referred to as being "Catholically-aligned," with which Judi too issue. 
I hope this is clearer. But a bigger issue lies at the heart of this and 
was the reason for the post in the first place.

The main issue in discussing all of this-- which both Judi's and Don's 
replies serve very well to highlight-- is the obvious 
Catholic-Protestant Problem my posts noted as being the *real* and more 
pressing issue in England, and not the supposed "Jewish Problem" with 
which this discussion began. Look at the history. The religious issues 
do not involve Jews, but Christians. That was my point. Rich's 
referencing polemical texts (again, I urge members to read Marotti's 
study), brought up the rift between Catholics and Protestants and this 
was never acknowledged.

Thanks,
Nicole

P.S. A potentially tangential question for Judi:  Could you please 
explain what "Anglo-Catholic" practice and ritual are? Being neither 
English, Catholic, nor Anglican, I'd appreciate your unpacking these.

[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:		Carol Barton <cbartonphd1@verizon.net>
Date:		Thursday, 13 Mar 2008 20:27:04 -0400
Subject: 19.0171 EMLS 13.3 Now Available
Comment:	Re: SHK 19.0171 EMLS 13.3 Now Available

Charles died protesting his faithfulness to Protestantism, on the 
scaffold, on 30 January 1649.

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, editor@shaksper.net
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

• Next message: Hardy M. Cook: "Untouchable Shakespeare"
• Previous message: Hardy M. Cook: "Regarding Merchant Articles in Relarts"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ]