Charles II Dbq Essay

The Act of Uniformity 1558, which required the population to attend Sunday service in an Anglican church, at which a new version of the Book of Common Prayer was to be used, passed by only three votes.[5] The Bill of Uniformity was more cautious than the initial Reformation Bill. It revoked the harsh laws proposed against Roman Catholics, it removed the abuse of the Pope from the litany and kept the wording that allowed for both a subjective and objective belief in the Real Presence in the Communion. After Parliament was dismissed, Elizabeth, along with Cecil, drafted what are known as the Royal Injunctions, 1559. These were additions to the settlement and largely stressed some continuity with the Catholic past: ministers were ordered to wear the surplice; wafers, as opposed to ordinary baker's bread, were to be used as the bread at Communion. There had been opposition to the settlement in the shires, which for the most part were largely Roman Catholic, so the changes are often said to have been made in order to allow for acceptance of the

The relationship and status of the monarchy in parliament’s eyes had already been in a state of decline even before Charles’ reign. His predecessor had been known as the ‘wisest fool in Christendom’ and there was a lot of resentment

After this was when things started to get harder for Charles V. He was faced with Religious differences as a challenge to political authority. Charles V.

At the time the parliamentarians were strongly against the catholic practises by the church of England which was under Charles 1. Charles with these

Henry IV of France was able to act as a "fox" by evaluating what mattered more to him. When Henry converted to Catholosism out of being a Hugenot during the Saint Bartholomew 's Day Massacre, it was clear that he valued his own life over religion. Even when he coverted back to Calvinism afterwards, he soon relized his valued of being in power over religion would cause him to convert, once again, back into Catholism. “Paris is worth a Mass," he said as he gave into the Roman Catholic Church for the leadership of France. This value of state over religion made him a politique, believing that no religious truth was worth the ravages of cicil war. He kept France from futher civil war by issuing the Edict of Nantes which acknowledged Catholicism as th official religion of France but guaranteed the Hugenots the rights to worship. He was wise to recognize that tolerance can help establish peace in his nation and also to convert to Cathalosism because of their bigger population in France.

At that time, Charles I was married to a Catholic woman, and thus his people did not trust him and suspected him of trying to bring them to civil war, a fight between Protestants and Catholics. Charles’ relationship with religion was a strained partnership that caused many issues and problems, and was somewhat unwieldy. In the case

Nevertheless I presume that the main reason, was religion because neither Parliament nor England trusted Charles’ religious status and did not want to change from Protestantism. Because they had had to may problems in the past.

From 1678 to 1681 the idea of 'The Popish Plot' took over conversation and became an obsession in the country. The Plot, which this time was entirely fictional, was created to scare the country into believing that Catholics where conspiring to dethrone Charles II like they had done in 1605 with the gunpowder plot. The cartoon shows parliament under one archway in session and Guy Fawkes in the other with the gunpowder to blow up parliament. This false plot was designed to create fear amongst the protestant community, it replicates the gunpowder plot of 1605, this print and the idea of a second plot increased the division in society for Catholics, a significant impact on the treatment of Catholics after the plot as even 80 years later the puritans still printed propaganda, the cartoon also implies the shunning off know Catholics in society. This occurrence was one of many replications of the plot, causing severe repercussions for Catholics.

King Charles' decisions and actions were a major cause of the English civil war. He supported various reforms which pushed a supposedly Catholic agenda, which many members of the predominantly Puritan parliament and people opposed. In fact, many thought he was a secretly Christian and was trying to enforce Anglicism and Catholicism on the people. (insert religious section here)

The century prior to The War of the Two Kings weakened Catholic’s position in society significantly. They lost their power, rights, and freedom to the newer English and Scottish settlers who were Protestant. However, when James II acceded the throne in 1685 after the death of his brother, a significant problem arose for Irish Protestants. As James II was a late convert to Roman Catholicism, he desired to fulfill God’s mission granted to him; the conversion of England from Protestantism to Catholicism. James II believed this would occur organically if people’s religion was based on their own morals by revoking legal blockades. However, when James II permitted religious tolerance and prohibited many laws that went against Catholicism, panic

Charles got off to a bad start in 1625 when he married a French, catholic princess called Henrietta Maria. This was a very bad mistake as Charles and most of England were devoted members of the Church of England (Protestants). This was wrong as the princess could have changed the religion of England by persuading her husband and also she could have made her

The ‘Long Parliament’- a direct result of events in Scotland, was disastrous for Charles. Pym and the rival faction took the opportunity provided by the ‘Long Parliament’ to pass the ‘Grand Remonstrance’- a list of grievances against the king. Charles was also forced to execute Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of Stafford and William Laud. The execution of Wentworth left a vacuum for royal authority in Ireland leading to the Irish rebellion in 1641. The historian John Morrill highlights the significance of the ‘Long Parliament’ in that Charles would no longer have the freedom to conduct his preferred ‘Personal Rule’ and therefore managers of the Parliament ‘set their sights high’ - rightfully anticipating great change from it.

Queen Elizabeth’s decision to put back the nation to a Protestant faith, following the previous Catholic based faith that her sister, Mary I, had set up in her reign, was heavily influenced by the constant change of religions, a religious turmoil, events and actions that was done following King Henry VIII’s time in 1509, and years after that. King Henry had broken with Rome, thus the Pope declaring himself as the head of the English national church. After him, Edward VI, Elizabeth’s brother had turned the nation into a full Protestant based faith but his reign had lasted for a very short time. Then again Mary I, also known as Bloody Mary, reunited with

Born at Ghent, 1500; died at Yuste, in Spain, 1558; was a descendant of the house of Hapsburg, and to this descent owed his sovereignty over so many lands that it was said of him that the sun never set on his dominions. Charles was the son of Philip, Duke of Burgundy, by Joanna, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, and Burgundy was the first heritage to which he at his led, on his fathers death in 1506. As he was a minor at that time, his aunt, Margaret of Austria, undertook the regency for him. William of Chièvres, his father's chief counsellor, had charge of the prince's household; Adrian of Utrecht, the Humanist and professor of theology at Louvain, who undertook his education,

It seems that each new day brings a new way that those in power are conspiring against us (“us” being Roman Catholics). It all started with a lie. Sweet Queen Catherine has, most unfortunately, been unable to produce an heir for the king; therefore, his brother, James, is the rightful successor to the throne of England (Kraft). However, the king also has an illegitimate son whom he cherishes, James, the Duke of Monmouth (Kraft). At face value, the problem seems nonexistent—of course the king’s brother should ascend the throne. But there is a problem! James II is a Catholic, as is the Queen. The Duke of Monmouth is not. There are many who are so blinded by their prejudices that they would rather anyone but a Catholic sit on the