Supremacy and Survival
I recently read a book lent to me by a friend titled "Supremacy and Survival" (subtitled: "How Catholics Endured the English Reformation") by Stephanie A. Mann, published in 2009 by Scepter Publishers, Inc., ISBN 978-1-59417-079-9. It is a discussion , based upon historical research and from her Catholic perspective, as to what transpired in England during the Tudor and Stuart reigns in detail continuing up to Pope emeritus Benedict XVI's recent visit to the British Isles. My friend told me that he found it a "quick read" which is true if you are somewhat familiar with British history from the "War of the Roses" which resulted with the victors, i.e., the Tudors, ruling England. What a reader may find confusing are all the key figures and twists and turns Stephannie Mann includes in the book. Fortunately her book includes four helpful tools: 1. the family trees of the House of Tudors and the House of Stuart (which followed the Tudors); 2. a bibliography of the 56 people she identifies as the Important historical Figures; 3. definitions of the Important Theological and Political Terms referred to in the book; and 4. a chart of 410 Years of Historical Events from 1485 to 1895.
I studied English History quite extensively in my undergraduate years when I was quite young and I have always been fascinated by it. One thing the author pointed out is that historically the "Whig" or progressive party's understanding of English History has been what most people have been taught though there were a few historians who looked at the events from a different perspective. This has changed around 1984 when more historians began seeing the historical events from the less popular perspective. These historians are frequently referred to as :"revisionists".
When I studied English History in college, most of the historians I read presented history from the "Whig" party perspective. The author of this book is kind, fair and balanced in her discussion of the subject and I found reading her account of English History refreshing and provoking.
Why read this book? For one thing it's very well written and written (with the handy tools she provided) for anyone with an interest in the subject. There are others reasons, one for example is after reading this book it is easy to understand why our United States Forefathers wrote the Constitution amended with the Bill of Rights (Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly, Press and [to] Petition the Government), as they did. This is especially currently of interest when it appears some of our constitutional rights may be in jeopardy. It also helps a person to understand the "suspicion" that groups of people have toward each other. As a person who believes in a God Who is involved in human history, this book hints at the evidence of Divine Providence. As a Catholic this book illustrates to me the resilience of the Catholic Church and of the perseverance of those Catholics who remained faithful for 300 years till they obtained the beginning of their emancipation in 1829 which to this day has yet to be fully achieved. (A Catholic cannot be the monarch nor prime minister.)
Reading this book their are a few ironies that come to light. For example, as most people recognize, Henry VIII's split from the Roman Catholic Church resulted from his desire for a male heir; ironically the three most successful rulers of England following Henry VIII have been women--Elizabeth I, Victoria and Elizabeth II. Another irony, Queen Mary, often referred as "Bloody Mary" had a peaceful, apparently joyful, death, whereas Queen Elizabeth I as she approached death suffered nightmares to the point that she was afraid to sleep and "Near the end she was speechless and could barely signal her agreement that James VI of Scotland succeed her". (p. 69, Supremacy and Survival) What is most ironic to me, is that under some of the early Protestant Stuart Kings of then Great Britain, though Catholics were prohibited from practicing their Faith and Catholic priests were martyred; possibly for political or diplomatic reasons many of these same kings married Catholic women and housed a Catholic Chaplain for these queens, allowed Catholic Mass and maintained and adorned a Catholic chapel within the palace. It is also reported that they had Catholics within their inner circle, at times more than Protestants. Eventually Charles II on his deathbed in 1685 converted to Catholicism.. His eventual Catholic descendants became "Pretenders to the Throne" , the last in line being a Catholic priest and cardinal, Henry Cardinal Stuart who if crowned would have been Henry IX. He lived in Italy and died in Rome in 1807.
In conclusion what can a person say other than: history is so interesting yet we must be sure it is reported accurately, without prejudice to the extent this is humanly possible. Recognizing that even people with the best intentions may let their bias influence what they write or say therefore the reader/listener need the point of view of the speaker/writer. Regarding Stephanie Mann's book, I believe she produced an accurate of her subject matter, than again like Stephanie I am Catholic.
I studied English History quite extensively in my undergraduate years when I was quite young and I have always been fascinated by it. One thing the author pointed out is that historically the "Whig" or progressive party's understanding of English History has been what most people have been taught though there were a few historians who looked at the events from a different perspective. This has changed around 1984 when more historians began seeing the historical events from the less popular perspective. These historians are frequently referred to as :"revisionists".
When I studied English History in college, most of the historians I read presented history from the "Whig" party perspective. The author of this book is kind, fair and balanced in her discussion of the subject and I found reading her account of English History refreshing and provoking.
Why read this book? For one thing it's very well written and written (with the handy tools she provided) for anyone with an interest in the subject. There are others reasons, one for example is after reading this book it is easy to understand why our United States Forefathers wrote the Constitution amended with the Bill of Rights (Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly, Press and [to] Petition the Government), as they did. This is especially currently of interest when it appears some of our constitutional rights may be in jeopardy. It also helps a person to understand the "suspicion" that groups of people have toward each other. As a person who believes in a God Who is involved in human history, this book hints at the evidence of Divine Providence. As a Catholic this book illustrates to me the resilience of the Catholic Church and of the perseverance of those Catholics who remained faithful for 300 years till they obtained the beginning of their emancipation in 1829 which to this day has yet to be fully achieved. (A Catholic cannot be the monarch nor prime minister.)
Reading this book their are a few ironies that come to light. For example, as most people recognize, Henry VIII's split from the Roman Catholic Church resulted from his desire for a male heir; ironically the three most successful rulers of England following Henry VIII have been women--Elizabeth I, Victoria and Elizabeth II. Another irony, Queen Mary, often referred as "Bloody Mary" had a peaceful, apparently joyful, death, whereas Queen Elizabeth I as she approached death suffered nightmares to the point that she was afraid to sleep and "Near the end she was speechless and could barely signal her agreement that James VI of Scotland succeed her". (p. 69, Supremacy and Survival) What is most ironic to me, is that under some of the early Protestant Stuart Kings of then Great Britain, though Catholics were prohibited from practicing their Faith and Catholic priests were martyred; possibly for political or diplomatic reasons many of these same kings married Catholic women and housed a Catholic Chaplain for these queens, allowed Catholic Mass and maintained and adorned a Catholic chapel within the palace. It is also reported that they had Catholics within their inner circle, at times more than Protestants. Eventually Charles II on his deathbed in 1685 converted to Catholicism.. His eventual Catholic descendants became "Pretenders to the Throne" , the last in line being a Catholic priest and cardinal, Henry Cardinal Stuart who if crowned would have been Henry IX. He lived in Italy and died in Rome in 1807.
In conclusion what can a person say other than: history is so interesting yet we must be sure it is reported accurately, without prejudice to the extent this is humanly possible. Recognizing that even people with the best intentions may let their bias influence what they write or say therefore the reader/listener need the point of view of the speaker/writer. Regarding Stephanie Mann's book, I believe she produced an accurate of her subject matter, than again like Stephanie I am Catholic.
Labels: History
posted by Paul Amrhein | 2:39 PM
|
0 comments
