“Elizabeth’s religious settlement was shaped by the attitudes and beliefs of Queen Elizabeth I herself” Assess the validity of this view. When Elizabeth ascended to the throne in 1558, she followed the fervently-Catholic reign of her half-sister Mary Tudor. As a raised Protestant, the nation prepared for religious changes back towards the Protestantism experienced during the reign of Edward VI. However, Elizabeth was not as devout to her religious callings as her siblings; Elizabeth wanted to minimise the instability that a complete religious overhaul would create, and therefore introduced a religious settlement as a via media: middle way. Elizabeth, due to her upbringing, was undoubtedly more Protestant than Catholic, but she nevertheless tried to be tolerant of the Catholics within England. This is largely because she did not want to alienate Catholic factions in mainland Europe, let alone in her own country, where a rebellion could overthrow her authority. Her belief in moderate Protestantism shaped the reforms she implemented, but naturally the actions of her subordinates were out of her control. However, the implemented measures of the Acts of Uniformity and Supremacy, along with other elements of the settlement, do reflect much of the Queen’s beliefs. Elizabeth believed, as did many people at the time, that religious authority stemmed from the reigning monarchy. Though the extent of this authority provided the basis for conflict between Protestant and Catholic ideologies in the early-Tudor period, Elizabeth sought to again reach a compromise to avoid alienating factions. To avoid rebelling factions, Elizabeth had to establish her prerogative to rule; declaring that she and she alone would be fit to rule England at the time. This is reflected by the Act of Supremacy,which established Elizabeth as the effective head of the Church of England. However, having a female head of the church would appeal to neither Catholic nor Protestant factions, and therefore she needed to reach a compromise to preserve her tolerant religious attitude. Therefore her title, unlike the previous Protestant titles of Edward VI and Henry VIII as ‘Supreme Head of the Church of England’, Elizabeth chose to be ‘Supreme Governor of the Church of England’. While some historians view this as conceding to Catholic factions (namely bishops in the House of Lords) that would otherwise not recognise her authority, in doing so losing some of her control of the country; other historians simply state that Elizabeth’s apparent concession was necessary to obtain more power in the long term. The implementation of visitors, however, conceded much of her power and control to commissioners who monitored reform in parishes. This would suggest that Elizabeth did not obtain all the power she desired, however she ultimately maintained her authority over the Church. One way this was achieved was through her Erastian structure, which created a hierarchy of bishops that she could control - a traditionally Catholic method of organisation. This enabled her to control more aspects of Tudor society, thereby exercising her power over the country. Equally, she did not alienate the factions: Catholics could still believe that the Pope was the head of the Church, and Protestants succeeded in removing the full authority from a female figure. Nevertheless, Elizabeth’s ruling prerogative emerged through this Act of Supremacy. The linked Act of Uniformity, and enforcement under the Royal Injunctions of 1559 also helped to ensure control stemmed from the
monarchy, as it imposed a religion upon all people in England. This therefore gives the impression that Elizabeth was able to influence the settlement with her own beliefs and attitudes, as it allowed her to retain power and control. Another key attitude for Elizabeth was to be tolerant of other religions; her own form of Protestantism was mild, and often infused aspects of Catholicism that radicals of the time would attempt to purge. She therefore was unlike her other siblings, particularly Mary, who attempted to rid the supposed scourge of Protestantism through burnings. To an extent, Elizabeth’s tolerance is present across her settlement in various forms. The most obvious is in the ambiguity within the Act of Uniformity. Although a single Book of Common Prayer, compiled from the books previously created by Thomas Cranmer, was implemented, it was very ambiguous and lenient in expectations of religious practice. For instance, one of the main divisions between Catholicism and Protestantism, the ritual of Eucharist, was open to interpretation. The variations between conservative views on transubstantiation, such as those favoured by Bishop Gardiner, were just as permittable as the reformative wording of European radicals. To this end, therefore, Elizabeth must have had influence over the settlement to enable tolerance within legislation, and this therefore suggests that her attitudes and beliefs were incorporated. Through the injunctions, Elizabeth even tried to persuade others to ignore religious differences, thus promoting peace both domestically and internationally. Elizabeth knew that changes in religion could isolate England from potential allies, and this put her nation at risk of invasion. Other aspects of the settlement appear to go against Elizabeth’s own beliefs.. The ThirtyNine Articles of 1563, which defined the new beliefs of the Church of England, highlighted predestination: a concept that was not accepted by both Catholics and Protestants. While it is true that the Queen leant towards Protestantism, her tolerance found in other parts of the settlement is missing within this section. This Calvinistic slant on doctrine would suggest that the Queen had little influence at this point in comparison to early on. Indeed Sir John Neale, in his now-refuted interpretation, assumed that the Queen’s previously Catholic settlement was overturned by the ‘Puritan Choir’ who pushed for a more Protestant version. This view was soon reviewed by Hudson, who instead suggested the Queen had always sought Protestant doctrine. This was supported by Peter Lake’s conclusion that ‘the Elizabethan regime was Protestant from the outset’. However, the Queen retained Catholic principles: she kept a crucifix in her own personal chapel, which suggests Catholic appreciation. Some historians suggest that the only reason for this crucifix, however, was to show how moderate England was when entertaining Catholic foreign powers. Another supposedly Catholic ornament, the vestments of priests, does suggest she had some involvement in Church affairs affected by the settlement, as her ‘Popish’ choices would otherwise have been avoided. Her views on ministers’ behaviour was also more traditionally Catholic, however most of her appointed bishops were not the conservatives of Mary’s reign. Her independence in selection suggests that she was able to choose the ministers who reflected her beliefs, which again suggests she actually was able to influence the settlement.
Other interpretations suggest that the government in other forms had much more of an influence than the Queen herself. While religious motives were undoubtedly influential in the formation of a religious settlement, maintaining peace internally was also an objective of government. Elizabeth wanted to ensure stability and peace domestically during her reign, and religious divides were often the cause for rebellion in previous Tudor reigns, such as those of Edward VI and Henry VIII. Therefore, the religious policy implemented could not be overtly radical, as it would otherwise dissuade people from supporting the monarchy. If purely by her own beliefs and attitudes, Elizabeth would strive to maintain internal peace, and therefore would not have included doctrine to establish mandatory religious practice, such as the Act of Uniformity, Royal Injunctions, and the Thirty-Nine Articles. In her eyes, imposing religious change would undoubtedly lead to rebellion, but she nevertheless had to maintain control. Therefore, this religious settlement was, in part, not shaped by her beliefs, but rather by the need to preserve the stability of government. Forcing the nation to conform to a religion presented Elizabeth with the power to control more easily, but equally increased the risk of rebellious factions developing. The other major influence that shaped this settlement was that of foreign powers. At the time, trade with other countries was crucial, and alienation by religious opposition would prevent trade with certain countries. Equally, England needed to maintain powerful allies, and the emergence of Protestantism began to create schisms between former European blocs. England faced two options. By remaining Catholic, they would be surrendering power to Rome and naturally would ally with other Catholic states, such as France and Spain. However, this religious standing could possibly alienate the Protestant Dutch, who were England's main trading partner. If instead, England returned to Protestantism, they would antagonize Catholic Spain, the most powerful nation in the world at the time. Therefore, Elizabeth’s own views were seconded by the need to preserve the sanctuary of the state, which would be violated if hostile attacks by enemy states were conducted. England faced the difficult decision of appealing to all states, and to this end the via media was the best possible option. However, the importance of protecting England from invasion meant that the Queen’s own beliefs and attitudes were far less important than whatever the most effective policy involved.
Ultimately, the settlement reflected more than simply the attitudes and beliefs of just Elizabeth; it showed the compromises she would need to make to remain in power. Rather than simply implementing her beliefs, she needed to account for relations with foreign powers, as well as domestic responses, to avoid alienation or factional resistance. Equally, the settlement was not entirely matched to Elizabeth’s beliefs: it often focused more on single faiths, usually Protestantism, instead of promoting tolerance. Furthermore, she made concessions in her power, which she wanted to maximise. Peter lake was correct in his statement that Elizabeth made it a Protestant Church of England from the start - she
definitely was not maintaining the Catholicism similar to Mary. Nevertheless, she managed to shape the statement with some of her beliefs; after all, she was able to shape the statement to incorporate some of her attitudes, and therefore the view that it was shaped by the ruling monarch at the time is valid.