Mary Tudor Impaled her Church on the Horns of an Impossible Dilemma: A Critical Evaluation - Research Paper Example

 Mary Tudor Impaled her Church on the Horns of an Impossible Dilemma: A Critical Evaluation Introduction Obviously Mary Tudor (Reign, 1953-1958) impaled her Church on the horns of an impossible dilemma, but the fact, to what extent she can be held responsible, is a matter of controversy because in the first place, the Restoration of papal authority in England was a short sighted step, though inevitably she has to do so because of its contribution to the revalidation of her mother Katherine of Aragon with the king Henry VIII. Primarily the dilemma of the Catholic Church was multifaceted in the sense that it pushed the church to grin and bear her actions throughout her reign in England. The Catholic Church had to face the crushing pressure from the Protestants, who got their strong foothold during the English Reformation and the reign of Protestant Edward VI from 1947 to 1953 and on the other hand, the church had to confront Mary’s questionable acts, accomplishments and her proceedings. If the Church supported, the Catholics would further be alienated from the grudging and resenting mob of the country. Mary restored Catholicism in the country from an ardent adherence to her Catholic faith, but her actions, which impaled the Church on the horn of an impossible dilemma, were intended to make her throne safe. Either she was oblivious to this dilemma or she carefully ignored them. Mary’s policies were meant to restore her faith as well as her power. She persecuted more than three hundred Protestants not only to restore Catholicism but also to get a firm hold on the power, because she could not keep faith on the support of the Catholics in England, as they were not strong enough to provide the support that the Queen needed during the moment of dangers. Indeed the dilemma of the Catholic Church can be viewed as the reflection of the dilemma of Mary the Queen that she suffered internally. Simultaneously she had to deal with two sides: the restoration of the Papal authority in England and the threats to her power. Rising Resentment of the English and the Growing Dilemma of the Church It is remarkable that at the beginning of her reign, Mary was not as despised as she was after the bloody persecutions of the Protestants and her marriage with Phillip, the king of Spain. After her enthronement, the Restoration of Catholicism in England was accepted by the English people with more or less resentment. She was greeted by the people as the true successor of the throne of England. Her popularity assisted her to overturn Lady Jane Grey at the 9th day of her. Except some extremist protestant activities, Mary was able to reverse the protestant changes of Edward VI. She restored the Catholic mass and banned Holy Communion. Nevertheless, Mary’s extreme steps against the resenting protestant can be viewed as her fear of the threats to her throne. Her decision to marry Phillip II, the Prince of Spain in the face of strong opposition of her advisors and the fellow citizens further supports this view. Therefore, the fact is evident that she was a devout catholic and she took those severe steps to restore her faith as well as to fortify her throne. Being worn by the continuous blow of the nationalistic zeal of the English Reformation, the Catholic sect of the country hardly could provide the Queen with any strong support. As George Macaulay Trevelyan comments on the fragility of the Catholic sect during the Tudor era, Roman Catholic zeal in England was at its lowest ebb when Henry struck at the medieval Church, and it failed to revive when his daughter Mary gave the old religion [Catholicism] another chance. It only recovered vigour with the Jesuit reaction well on in the reign of Elizabeth. That revival came a generation too late for success, and it came from continental sources that infuriated the rising nationalism of the English.1 Being provoked by the assumed dangers from the existing powerful protestant sects, she adopted zero-tolerance policies that contributed to the dilemma of the church keeping it apparently inactive in the face of mass resentment due to the fear of being alienated from the mass population. Mary’s failure to perceive or deliberate ignorance of the universal detest of the ordinary English people for Phillip II, whatever the case might be, further put the Church into crisis during the conflict between Spain and Pope Paul IV in 1955. Forse comments on the hatred of the English for Spain, ‘[Phillip], and his Spanish entourage, were hated and feared even before their arrival in England, and once there were treated with hostility and contempt throughout Mary’s reign’2. Mary’s fear of the Protestants rested on two presuppositions: (1) that during the Edward period Protestantism gained a strong foothold in the mainland of England winning over the majority of Englishmen with the nationalistic sentiment throughout the English Reformation, and (2) that these Protestant Englishmen would manipulate her restoration of Catholic Church in the country to evoke the anger of the common English by upholding Mary, her Catholic faith, her marital relation with Spanish Catholic Philip, and their hatred of the jurisdictions of the Roman Pope.3 ‘Bloody Mary’ and Cranmer Crisis: Failure of Queen Mary’s Mission In spite of her high popularity among the common people, her severe policies to suppress the Protestants instantly evoked the hatred of the people and propounding her policy an utter failure. Two years after her enthronement, she invoked the old heresy law in 1954 in order to persecute those who refused to accept her catholic restoration. About three hundred Protestants were burnt on the charge of heresy. These severe persecutions instantly infuriated the ordinary mob to lend support for the Protestants’ causes. In the face of the growing resentment of the common, the church had no other way but to remain inactive in fear of being alienated from the common. At that time, the Catholic Church was not brawny enough to prevent Mary in support of the Common people or play any role in support of Mary. Mary’s heresy law, first enacted in 1954, caused the uproar of the English after burning of the prominent figures like John Roger, Cranmer, and several other Protestant Bishops. Though the burnings of the ordinary humble Englishmen initiated the flood of fury, Mary’s papal restoration was seriously challenged with the heretic execution of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley. These nobles were influential enough to challenge Mary’s authority. Concerning the anger of the English, Brenda Ralph Lewis comments, The deaths of these ordinary humble Englishmen unleashed a flood of fury, and the storm rose in intensity with each successive burning of such people as artisans, housewives, farm workers and other lay folk. They bore the brunt of the persecution mainly because they were too humble or too poor to emulate richer Protestants who had escaped abroad…The idea soon grew that these heretics were dying not for the Protestant religion, but because submitting to Catholic authority meant betraying England and turning it over to foreign and papal influence.4 Mary Tudor’s Marriage with Phillip of Spain: the Dilemma of the Church The Catholic Church was further pushed towards the dilemma by Mary’s decision to marry the Prince of Spain Phillip II. During the Restoration period, Spain started to emerge as the rising power of the continental politics of Europe. In both trade and military power, Spain was feared by the English people. The root of the fear of the English in the marriage of the couple of Philip and Mary lies in the fact Philip would handle the issue to exert power and control over the country. Indeed the opposition of the people was engendered much by the growing nationalistic feeling of the Tudor era. However, on Mary’s part the marriage was counted to facilitate both Catholicism and the enforcement of her control over the protestant threat.5 Certainly, the marriage reflects Mary’s inner conflicts regarding her religious faith and the threat to her power from the Protestants, as Trevelyan says, She cared only for the souls of the English, and believed they would be safer in Italian and Spanish hands…..Wrapt in doctrinal studies or religious ecstasies, [Mary] never had an eye for the great outlines of the Tudor policy…6 Hence, it was a torment for the Church, as it was on its current weak foothold in the post-Edward Protestant plot of the country, to side with Mary enraging the common English. The church had to deal with the nationalistic feelings, the anger of the people of England, which was further stimulated with Mary’s severe crackdown policies over the Protestants, and on the other hand, it had to retain the newly gained hold over the power play of the country. If the church supported Mary’s marriage with Philip, in Marian Context it meant to treachery with England and at the same time became the object of severe criticism of the Protestants, which might make the Catholic front morally weak, as Dickens wrote that Philip was, Certainly not the people’s man; for they detested the idea of such a marriage from the beginning to the end, and murmured that the Spaniard would establish in England, by the aid of foreign soldiers, the worst abuses of the Popish religion, and even the terrible Inquisition itself. 7 Growing Nationalism versus Relation with Rome and Spain The situation, in which the Marian Church was stuck, appeared to be such that the closer Mary’s relation with Rome was; the more the English Nationalism was growing. When Mary attempted to restore the papal authority, English Reformation had received a twenty-year maturity. Many of the changes that the Reformation brought to England were the demand of the age for a long time and accepted by the English with a warm reception. Therefore, it appeared that Mary attempted to restore the papal authority for such a generation to whom the Papal Authority was completely alien and strange.8 By the time, the new generation grew a sentiment that was patriotic and hated any foreign jurisdiction. The people of England including this generation became fairly habituated with larger religious freedom that the Reformation brought to them. Reading scripture was one of these liberties that were denied by the Papal Authority.9 Reading the holy book in their own native language in their native land formed a sense of patriotism in the hearts of these people who, though bore Mary’s reformation, strongly opposed her marriage with Phillip of Spain because of the fear of being dominated by the most powerful Catholic state of Europe. Consequently, the resentment of the English population led to the Wyatt Rebellion. The “Wyatt Rebellion” in 1554 was to be viewed as the revelation of the increasing nationalistic zeal of the English against the Church of Rome. Prior to the rebellion Mary’s close relationship with Rome was not going well with the growing sense of nationalism in the mainland of England. There always existed the threat of Protestant upheaval with the support of the common. Moreover, Mary’s attempt to restore the Catholic Church overnight aggravated the situation. After the failed attempt of John Dudley to enthrone Edward’s Protestant wife and at the same time cousin Elizabeth was in the focus of the protestant conspiracies. Moreover, she was the legal heir of the throne of England. At such a complicated situation, Mary’s decision to marry Spanish King Phillip set the church in a more uncomfortable situation. Restoration of the Papal Authority might be palatable for the people of England but her matrimonial decision was beyond exaggeration. Indeed Mary’s matrimonial decision paved the way for protestant opponents to manipulate the situation in their own favour and at the same time keeping her Catholic block dumbfound. At the news of her marriage that leaked out in the autumn of 1553, the Duke of Suffolk, Edward Courtenay Earl of Devon and Sir Edmund Warner rose to manipulate the emotion of the ordinary people in order to stage a Protestant Rebellion to replace Mary with Elizabeth. As B. R. Lewis says in this regard, Once more, London was the scene of riots. Catholic priests were beaten up and threatened, and in January 1554, a full-scale rebellion erupted in Kent. Fifteen thousand armed men, led by Sir Thomas Wyatt, marched on London with demands that Queen Mary enter the Tower and that four Privy Councilors be handed over as hostages for her promise to marry an Englishman.10 Unexpected Twist in Mary-Rome Relation and the Strife Mary Tudor’s restoration proceedings received an unexpected twist when in 1955 Gian Pietro Caraffa was elected as Pope Paul IV. At the ascent of Pope Paul IV, Mary’s relationship with Rome was pushed towards strife due to several reasons and the Church of England was at stake more than ever. Christopher Haigh points out the relation between the Election of Pope Paul IV, and the Enactment of Heresy Law, and consequently, the crisis of the Church due to the strife between Spain and Pope Paul. Pope Paul IV was a great devotee to the Inquisition that was a matter of horror for his fellowmen. He was also the embodiment of the spirit of persecution. It is remarkable that Mary revived the old heresy law on 30 November 1554. Nevertheless, the law was being enforced from 20th January 1555, the years Gian Pietro Caraffa ascended the Papal Throne. Mary’s persecution under the law was a clear show of union with the new Pope.11 However, it enraged the ordinary people of England, but her steps were of no effect to draw the favour of the Pope. Even more the new Pope entered on a bloody war with the Collona allies of Spain that put both Mary and English Church at an impossible dilemma, because then England is a marriage ally with Spain. The selection of Carlo Caraffa the youngest nephew of the Pope as a cardinal enraged the Roman. Heretics in Rome were being burnt in the Campo de Fiori in order to stamp out the traces of Reformation. Ultimately, the “Inquisitor Pope’s” mission failed and riot broke out when the Pope was at his deathbed. As Pope Paul himself was in a severe strife with Spain, Mary had no other way to receive the support of Rome until the truce was established in 1957. As Ciro Paoletti summarizes the conflict between Spain and Rome in the following lines, ‘In 1956, Pope Paul IV, who was strongly against Spain, ordered the Colonnas to leave the fief of Paliano. The chief of the family refused and…asked that King… Phillip II, new king of Spain- for Military Support. The war lasted until 1557.’12 The Pope-Phillip war put the English church into a predicament due to the marital alliance of England with Spain. Conclusion During her reign, Mary impaled the English Church on the horns of an impossible dilemma. Obviously some of the crises of the church, especially the Catholic Church, were inevitable in the post Edward Protestant dominant plot, but Mary was, to a major and crucial extent, responsible for most of these crises of the church. Primarily, Mary’s decision to marry the catholic Spanish Phillip to help her cause pushed the church into an incurable predicament by leaving the Church to confront the nationalistic zeal of the fellow citizens. Later her marriage further put the relation of the English Church with Pope Paul IV into further crisis. After all, her proceedings of the restoration of Roman Catholicism were to be counted as her irreparable mistakes that finally petrified the Protestant foothold in England. Bibliography Carter Lindburg (ed) 2002 The Reformation Theologians, Blackwell. Dickens, C., A Child’s History of England, (New Jersey: Werner and Co, n.d.), p. 265 Forse, J. H., ‘How "Unpopular" Were Philip And The Spanish In The Popular Opinion Of Mary’s Day?’ West Virginia Shakespeare and Renaissance Association Selected Papers, vol. 21 (1998), p. 23 Haigh, C., English Reformation. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), p. 205 Jones, N. L., The English Reformation: Religion and Cultural Adaptation. (London: Willey-Blackwell, 2008) Lewis, B. R., ‘Mary Tudor: A Most Unhappy Queen’, British Heritage Magazine, vol. 3, no. 8 (2006). p. 26 McCulloch, D., Reformation Europe's House Divided 1490-1700, (London, 2003), p. 127 Paoletti, C., A Military History of Italy. (New York: Greenwood, 2008), p.14 Powell, P. W., Tree of Hate: Propaganda and Prejudices Affecting United States Relations with the Hispanic World. (New York: Basic Books, 1971), pp. 93-95. Trevelyan, G. M., A Shortened History of England. (London: Penguin Group), 1987, p. 203 Read More