History Buffs - I Need Help!!!

by writerpen 11 Replies latest jw friends

  • writerpen

    I've been working on this homework for a week now (have completed everything else) and have been searching the answer for this one question without any luck. Can some of you history buffs steer me in the right direction? Thanks

    Why was
  • Francois

    Because it

  • writerpen

    Sorry, this is the question, and I can't seem to figure out how to go back and edit with this new format.

    Why was

  • writerpen

    Here goes again - I've been trying to cut and paste and it isn't working.

    Why was England more successful than other lands in resolving its internal political and religious division peacefully during the 16th and 17th centuries?

  • Double Edge
    Double Edge

    I'm sure some of our Brit cousins will fill you in, but my take on it is unlike the rest of Europe, the church started to take a complete back seat to secular politics in the 1500's when Henry VIII told the Pope to go take a hike.. he was getting a divorce, church or no church. Spain and France, the 'superpowers' of the time both paid homage to Rome and were greatly influenced by the Vatican.

    Also, I'm not so sure how 'peaceful' the 17th century was in England. They had three civil wars involving England, Scotland and Ireland...

  • blondie

    Because England/UK is an island and it was harder for the Pope to get other countries to enforce his edicts. In 1588 the Spanish Armada was defeated by the British ending the last papal attempt to bring them back into the fold. Of course the period between Henry 8 defection, the swing back to Catholicism under the reign of Mary his daughter, and then the swing back under Edward and Elizabeth was an especially bloody period. Mary, Queen of Scots, son became King of England and Scotland, ending the last Protestant/Catholic schism on the island.


  • Englishman
    Why was England more successful than other lands in resolving its internal political and religious division peacefully during the 16th and 17th centuries?

    It wasn't peaceful initially. Henry 8 made the break from Catholicism so as he could divorce and later marry his ladylove, Anne Boleyn, and in so doing made the reigning monarch the "Defender of the Faith". In short, he put himself at the head of the church so as he could get his leg over with impunity..

    Most of the population were delighted to be free of Rome, and were happy to accept a much watered down version of religion, which is still the case in Britain today. We had to burn a few Catholics to achieve this happy state. Our national religion is C.o.E, which actually means "Church of England". Being "CoE" is easy, and demands no standards whatsoever. Most people are CoE and are comfortable with one another in their total disinterest. The Queen is CoE and is head of the church. Most of us are CoE and live peaceably in our apathy.


  • Pleasuredome

    just imagine what the WTS would be like in government, and you would have this guy...

    oliver cromwell. lord protector, 1653-1658

    parliment had king charles I, had his head chopped off, and the great general cromwell became the country's ruler. although making the country strong, he was a puritan, who banned christmas celebrations, theatre and dancing and people had to wear drab clothes.

  • cruzanheart
    Why was England more successful than other lands in resolving its internal political and religious division peacefully during the 16th and 17th centuries?

    I agree with the people who say Henry VIII started it, but I believe it was more than just his break with the Catholic Church that allowed England to become such a united and stable power. (1) The Church: By consolidating the power of the Church with the power of the King, that eliminated outside influences and made Britain autonomous. After Henry died, there was a serious power struggle between the Protestants, who wanted to keep the power in England, and the Catholics, who wanted to return England to the Mother Ship, i.e., Rome and the Pope. Bloody Mary did her best to do that, first by just being a Catholic and pledging her allegience to the Pope, and then by marrying the King of Spain and bringing the Inquisition to England. Fortunately for everyone, she was quite sickly and died before she could kill her half-sister Elizabeth.

    Now, I believe Elizabeth was the greatest ruler England has had because, while Victoria accomplished great things, it was more through her ministers, whereas Elizabeth was still pretty much ruling solo back then. She was quite brilliant in her strategy, surrounded herself with good advisers as well as toadies, and did not for one minute let her heart rule her head, which is why she never married. She preferred power and saw to it that England stayed English with no foreign influences. AND she had the foresight to name James of Scotland her heir, in spite of her dislike for James' mother, which united the two countries and made Great Britain a power to be reckoned with. Until, of course, World War I, when we Yanks had to come bail out the Brits. (JUST KIDDING, E-MAN!!!!!)

    Nina (of the British-History-Fanatic class)

  • Big Tex
    Big Tex

    Okay, but don't you also have to factor in that there is the Channel, thereby isolating all of Britain? I mean that made it impossible for the Pope to send (or have France and Spain) an army marching into London and restoring them to Catholicsm.

    I think the unity of the UK was brought about by a harmonic convergence of being an island, Henry VIII, the Reformation, the Renaissance and the greatest ruler in English history: Elizabeth I. Realize that in 100 years England went from a feudal backwater country that fought against itself to a world power. There really wasn't one reason, but several that came together in a relatively short space of time.

Share this