WI: A more High-Church Church of England?

Fabius Maximus

In Anglicanism, the High Church movement is the wing of the Church that emphasises more "Catholic" elements of belief and religious worship, like the importance of the sacraments, priestly authority, and the use of traditional liturgical elements such as incense, Catholic-style vestments, prayers to saints, and so forth. Although there had been people with more "High-Church" views from the beginning of Anglicanism, the movement didn't really become mainstream until the 19th century, and even then has never really been dominant in the Church of England.

ITTL, let's say that Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth are all more conservative in their religious beliefs, meaning that the Church of England is a High Church body from the beginning. The Church's official doctrine is High Church, and its liturgy is also very High (although changes from the old Catholic liturgies are still permissable). How does this affect English culture and attitudes towards the rest of Europe?
 
piratedude

piratedude

You probably can get this, or at least most of it, by having the English protestant movement lean more towards Lutheran theology than to Reformed theology
 
Viking25

Viking25

Fabius Maximus said:
ITTL, let's say that Henry VIII, Edward VI, and Elizabeth are all more conservative in their religious beliefs, meaning that the Church of England is a High Church body from the beginning. The Church's official doctrine is High Church, and its liturgy is also very High (although changes from the old Catholic liturgies are still permissable). How does this affect English culture and attitudes towards the rest of Europe?
Click to expand...
TBH Henry VIII was already pretty conservative in his religious views. Really aside from making himself the head of the church he didn't actually change the liturgy or doctrine all that much from memory.
 
Math

Math

increase Henry VIII's religious influence on his children, or for Mary to convert to Anglicanism in the style of Henri IV and Subvert the church from within, it was Edward and Elizabeth who ultimately down the church. They were more inclined towards Calvinist ideas. In this alternative scenario, we might witness a stronger anti-Protestant sentiment compared to anti-Catholicism, particularly with non-conformist movements. These non-conformist groups would likely express their dissent more fervently with an Anglican Church that displays a greater alignment with Catholicism, Probably embracing rituals (Incense), Marian devotion, and the veneration of saints. As a result, we would probably see an escalation in animosity between Nonconformists and the Anglican Church.

In terms of the relationship with the Pope, if a movement like the Oxford Movement emerges, attempts at reconciliation between the two churches may occur, leading to a situation similar to that of the Eastern Catholic Churches. This would involve maintaining a distinct liturgy while recognizing the Pope as the head of the church.

An interesting aspect would be Elizabeth, with the potential religious influence if she were more aligned with her father's beliefs and With a greater harmony with Catholic doctrines, she might even consider marrying a Catholic.
 
Last edited:

Minchandre

Viking25 said:
Nah Eddie VI was probably the rabidly protestant Tudor.
Click to expand...
High Church isn't necessarily anti-Protestant. While classifying it as "more Catholic" is the natural comparison, you can also say that it's "more Lutheran" rather than the Low Church's "more Reformed".

That said...you're absolutely right about Edward VI, who did a lot to "Protestantize" the Church of England even in just a few years as a child king.

Let's try another tack, though: OTL, Mary almost immediately reversed her brother's religious reforms (effectively reverting the C of E to "Catholic but without the whole Pope thing"). Of course, she then went on to ban Protestantism entirely within a year or so more, allegedly due to her husband's influence (though in fairness, every bad thing she did was blamed on her foreign, Catholic husband's influence).

Maybe she ends up marrying a good Englishman instead of Philip? She was only engaged to Philip after becoming queen. OTL, Parliament strongly advised her against her marriage and the engagement was accompanied by violence.

Philip was not thrilled with the marriage, if I remember right, but his father forced it on him.

Who's a good alternate husband?
 

Thomas Jefferson

Edward VI's low church tendencies were the result of a Calvinist faction at court which more or less staged a coup near Henry VIII's death, getting him to rewrite his will in their favor and icing out conservatives. If this coup wasn't successful, young Edward would likely have continued his father's religiously conservative policies, or even been persuaded to reconcile with the pope.
 

Fabius Maximus

Viking25 said:
TBH Henry VIII was already pretty conservative in his religious views. Really aside from making himself the head of the church he didn't actually change the liturgy or doctrine all that much from memory.
Click to expand...
He abolished monasticism, pilgrimage, veneration of relics, prayers to the saints, and (IIRC) prayers for the dead. The CofE under Henry was more High-Church than it would be under Edward or Elizabeth, but it wasn't simply "Catholicism without the Pope" as is often claimed.
 

isabella

Minchandre said:
High Church isn't necessarily anti-Protestant. While classifying it as "more Catholic" is the natural comparison, you can also say that it's "more Lutheran" rather than the Low Church's "more Reformed".

That said...you're absolutely right about Edward VI, who did a lot to "Protestantize" the Church of England even in just a few years as a child king.

Let's try another tack, though: OTL, Mary almost immediately reversed her brother's religious reforms (effectively reverting the C of E to "Catholic but without the whole Pope thing"). Of course, she then went on to ban Protestantism entirely within a year or so more, allegedly due to her husband's influence (though in fairness, every bad thing she did was blamed on her foreign, Catholic husband's influence).

Maybe she ends up marrying a good Englishman instead of Philip? She was only engaged to Philip after becoming queen. OTL, Parliament strongly advised her against her marriage and the engagement was accompanied by violence.

Philip was not thrilled with the marriage, if I remember right, but his father forced it on him.

Who's a good alternate husband?
Click to expand...
As Philip tried to keep Mary’s religious excesses under control and was against her anti-protestant Crusade I fear who with a different husband Mary would do worse than OTL
 

GregTheWolf144

No English Civil War or a Royalist win in the English Civil War allows Charles I to work with the Pope to incorporate the Church of England as a particular church/create an Anglican Rite, which IIRC he was trying to do
 

Fabius Maximus

GregTheWolf144 said:
No English Civil War or a Royalist win in the English Civil War allows Charles I to work with the Pope to incorporate the Church of England as a particular church/create an Anglican Rite, which IIRC he was trying to do
Click to expand...
He was accused of trying to do that by contemporaries, but IIRC there isn't much evidence that he was anything other than a high-church Protestant.

That said, if he and Laud manage to make the CofE a more high-church institution, that could pave the way for reunification a few generations down the line.

Come to think of it, Charles II converted to Catholicism on his deathbed -- if he wanted to, would he be able to implement the sort of reforms Charles I tried and failed to? On the one hand the monarchy's position was more precarious than before the Civil War; on the other hand, basically everybody wanted to avoid a repeat of the Civil War, whilst the more radical Puritans had made themselves quite unpopular during Cromwell's protectorate.
 

VVD0D95

Banned
Fabius Maximus said:
He was accused of trying to do that by contemporaries, but IIRC there isn't much evidence that he was anything other than a high-church Protestant.

That said, if he and Laud manage to make the CofE a more high-church institution, that could pave the way for reunification a few generations down the line.

Come to think of it, Charles II converted to Catholicism on his deathbed -- if he wanted to, would he be able to implement the sort of reforms Charles I tried and failed to? On the one hand the monarchy's position was more precarious than before the Civil War; on the other hand, basically everybody wanted to avoid a repeat of the Civil War, whilst the more radical Puritans had made themselves quite unpopular during Cromwell's protectorate.
Click to expand...
I think if there was a will then yes. But Charles was an incredibly cautious man by nature so whether he’d want to rock the boat I don’t know.
 

Nuraghe

GregTheWolf144 said:
No English Civil War or a Royalist win in the English Civil War allows Charles I to work with the Pope to incorporate the Church of England as a particular church/create an Anglican Rite, which IIRC he was trying to do
Click to expand...

it may be probable but very difficult to realize, but it must be said Otl there were some important contacts between the Holy See and Stuart England, starting from the accession of James VI as king up to the glorious revolution, the most salient moments concern in particular the reigns of Charles I and his son Charles II ( the English interference in the conclave that elected Innocent XI in 1676 is noteworthy ), the former even came to discuss with Rome the creation of a British cardinal ( the Scotsman George Conn, pupil of the Barberini family and "ambassador" of the royal couple on site in 1633, it must also be said that there was talk of a similar thing also in the kingdom of the namesake son concerning the Irish, however, as a way to reward their loyalty to the Stuarts ) and a possible re-foundation ( controlled by the sovereign ) of the Knights Hospitallers on land from Albion in 1636 ( as a place of outlet for the most warlike young papists, to be sent away from the kingdom )
 
Last edited:

Kellan Sullivan

Math said:
increase Henry VIII's religious influence on his children, or for Mary to convert to Anglicanism in the style of Henri IV and Subvert the church from within, it was Edward and Elizabeth who ultimately down the church. They were more inclined towards Calvinist ideas. In this alternative scenario, we might witness a stronger anti-Protestant sentiment compared to anti-Catholicism, particularly with non-conformist movements. These non-conformist groups would likely express their dissent more fervently with an Anglican Church that displays a greater alignment with Catholicism, Probably embracing rituals (Incense), Marian devotion, and the veneration of saints. As a result, we would probably see an escalation in animosity between Nonconformists and the Anglican Church.

In terms of the relationship with the Pope, if a movement like the Oxford Movement emerges, attempts at reconciliation between the two churches may occur, leading to a situation similar to that of the Eastern Catholic Churches. This would involve maintaining a distinct liturgy while recognizing the Pope as the head of the church.

An interesting aspect would be Elizabeth, with the potential religious influence if she were more aligned with her father's beliefs and With a greater harmony with Catholic doctrines, she might even consider marrying a Catholic.
Click to expand...
Again, not sure where this belief in Liz being the Calvinist comes from. Edward was the Calvinist, Low Church one. Liz despised Calvinists, and the only time she went along with them was when it was politically convenient to do so
 

Kellan Sullivan

Minchandre said:
, allegedly due to her husband's influence (though in fairness, every bad thing she did was blamed on her foreign, Catholic husband's influence).
Click to expand...
It was ALL Mary. Felipe was the one who told her NOT to do this, Felipe was also the one who told her NOT to burn all those Protestants. A stance for which he was roundly criticized as "lukewarm" by English Catholics. Felipe wasn't lukewarm, but he was pragmatic. He knew what dragons teeth Mary was sowing.
 

Janprimus

Kellan Sullivan said:
It was ALL Mary. Felipe was the one who told her NOT to do this, Felipe was also the one who told her NOT to burn all those Protestants. A stance for which he was roundly criticized as "lukewarm" by English Catholics. Felipe wasn't lukewarm, but he was pragmatic. He knew what dragons teeth Mary was sowing.
Click to expand...
If only Filips/Philippe would have stayed so pragmatic later during his reign, but I digress. Given her treatment, I can't totally blame Mary to want to return then favour, but Philip was right top urge her to be pragmatic and take a more long term approach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top