Fate of Protestantism in a world where England remains Catholic?

[raharris1973]

To what degree is England remaining Catholic here? Is it staying 100% Catholic like Spain or does Calvinism still gain a toehold due to trading with the Dutch? If the latter, Protestantism could still easily spread due to England exporting its Calvinists to the Americas like France did with the Hugenots. However, the English Civil War turns into a war of religion and kicks off earlier. If the former, Mary and Phillip's marriage probably goes over better and closer Anglo-Spanish cooperation puts France in a spot they're not going to like the next time they butt heads with the Habsburgs.

France exporting its Calvinists to the Americas, successfully, did *not* happen. It just gets what iffed so much people start to misperceive it did! Hah!

Another thought - is an England remaining Catholic an automatic kill for Protestant/Presbyterian Scotland?

 

[HortenseMancini]

Another thought - is an England remaining Catholic an automatic kill for Protestant/Presbyterian Scotland?

I don’t doubt that England would want Scotland Catholic…whether they can impose that desire on the Scots is another matter

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

I voted for the second, or regional option.

IOTL, the English Kings and English establishment adopted a version of Protestantism as the government supported branch of Christianity. So did, separately, the Scandinavian monarchs ,much of the German nobility, and the Teutonic knights. These versions were the Anglican version in England and the German versions in Scandinavia that retained bishops and other Catholic practices. The elites in Scotland and the Netherlands revolted and adopted a more radical version, centered around the writings of John Calvin.

England eventually became a powerful nation, by far the most powerful Protestant nation, and this led to Protestantism being spread around the world. Without the adherence of the English elite, versions of Protestantism became the established church in countries weaker than England. It had also spread throughout Europe as a minority or underground movement, centered on Calvins writings.

Also IOTL, the long promised and long delayed Church Council finally got off the ground as the Council of Trent, and produced a revised and reformed Catholicism. Pre-reformation Catholicism was somewhat different (for example, it was less centralized and there was no provision for anonymous confession). And later, in the seventeenth century, Catholicism developed its own Calvinist current in the form of Jansenism.

So ITTL, Protestantism without the support of the English establishment becomes much less influential and important. Once they have established their own national churches, there is no reason for the Scandinavians to recuse into the main Catholic fold. There could well be some recusal among the nobles within Germany.

There are two big questions, which are what happens to Calvinism and the reformed variety of Protestantism, and what happens to the Council of Trent and the Counter-Reformation. These questions are linked, due to the Counter-Reformation being to a large extent a response to Calvinism. There might not even be a Council of Trent ITTL.

Calvinism could wind up being folded back within the Catholic fold as Jansenism ITTL. It might be crushed to some degree. It also might become the default religion of middle-class Christians everywhere, with the high nobility in all countries retaining allegiance to the Catholic hierarchy (except for Lutheran and Orthodox countries). And how this developes butterflies into a different Enlightenment.

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

ITTL, I will make the assumption that Elizabeth keeps the Church of England within the Catholic fold, for whatever reason. This POD would actually work if her father and brother never separated the Church of England in the first place, but also work if they did, but Elizabeth herself decided to stay in allegiance to Rome for personal reasons, and after the reign of her sister decided she could take the Church of England with her, and she didn't have to act like Christina and abdicate if she was to remain personally Catholic.

Her heir is still the Protestant King James VI of Scotland. ITTL, James VI and Charles I were "high" Protestants, but sincere Protestants. So in English history, this timeline produces its first POD with the succession of Elizabeth. One complication is that she is unlikely to execute Mary of Scotland ITTL, since no one will be looking to replace Catholic Elizabeth with Catholic Mary. Nor is she going to be at war with Felipe II. She might intervene in Scotland in an attempt to turn Scotland Catholic. She might find an alternative Catholic heir, including getting married and producing one herself. James VI could also convert to Catholicism. This will affect British history in the seventeenth century, and either the wars in the 1640s don't happen or they result in a much cleaner break.

 

[Math]

Honestly France converting to Protestantism just to spite England is very on brand

No, the result would be the same as in the OTl civil war, with the Catholics winning in the end, in this case England, if the French king had turned Protestant, could try to use the plantagenet claim. There is still the worst case, an Anglo-Hapsburg intervention in conjunction with the French Catholic league

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

Catholic England affects the Book of Common Prayer, the King James Version of the Bible, and on the Shakespeare plays. All of these had major effects on literature and on the English language itself. All three may potentially not even happen with a Catholic English establishment.

 

[Math]

ITTL, I will make the assumption that Elizabeth keeps the Church of England within the Catholic fold, for whatever reason. This POD would actually work if her father and brother never separated the Church of England in the first place, but also work if they did, but Elizabeth herself decided to stay in allegiance to Rome for personal reasons, and after the reign of her sister decided she could take the Church of England with her, and she didn't have to act like Christina and abdicate if she was to remain personally Catholic.

Her heir is still the Protestant King James VI of Scotland. ITTL, James VI and Charles I were "high" Protestants, but sincere Protestants. So in English history, this timeline produces its first POD with the succession of Elizabeth. One complication is that she is unlikely to execute Mary of Scotland ITTL, since no one will be looking to replace Catholic Elizabeth with Catholic Mary. Nor is she going to be at war with Felipe II. She might intervene in Scotland in an attempt to turn Scotland Catholic. She might find an alternative Catholic heir, including getting married and producing one herself. James VI could also convert to Catholicism. This will affect British history in the seventeenth century, and either the wars in the 1640s don't happen or they result in a much cleaner break.

I believe that a Catholic Elizabeth will not let Mary be arrested in Scotland, England will certainly have a considerable number of Protestants in the south, and an example of Protestants rebelling, arresting and killing a monarch in a neighboring country won't be something she's happy with.

Edit: Well there is also the chance of a scenario where Elizabeth decides to become Catholic, of her marrying Felipe II as he wanted after Mary Death.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

Her heir is still the Protestant King James VI of Scotland.

Scotland didn't officially become Protestant until after Elizabeth came to the throne, and partly through her help. ITTL I think Scotland remaining Catholic, while not certain, is probably more likely than it becoming Protestant.

Nor is she going to be at war with Felipe II.

I dunno, Henry VIII had opposed the Hapsburgs when they seemed to be getting too powerful, even before the break with Rome. England remaining Catholic would take away one reason for war, but war might happen anyway.

Catholic England affects the Book of Common Prayer, the King James Version of the Bible, and on the Shakespeare plays. All of these had major effects on literature and on the English language itself. All three may potentially not even happen with a Catholic English establishment.

TBF, very little of Shakespeare's work touches directly on religious controversy, so his corpus could still be almost identical under a Catholic government. The lack of a Book of Common Prayer or King James Bible would have more of an effect; translations of liturgical texts into the vernacular were actually quite common in this period, but unless the government enforces one as standard it's hard to see any individual translation becoming as widely-used, and therefore having the same influence, as OTL's BCP and KJV.

 

[Math]

Scotland didn't officially become Protestant until after Elizabeth came to the throne, and partly through her help. ITTL I think Scotland remaining Catholic, while not certain, is probably more likely than it becoming Protestant.

Two ways to Scotland, becoming ITTL Ireland (with ulster being the Highlands) Or Conform (What is the most likely scenario).

 

[Analytical Engine]

Catholic England affects the Book of Common Prayer, the King James Version of the Bible, and on the Shakespeare plays. All of these had major effects on literature and on the English language itself. All three may potentially not even happen with a Catholic English establishment.

I was also considering its affect on the Welsh language, since William Salesbury won't be commissioned by Elizabeth to write a Welsh New Testament in 1567.

However, he had written an English-Welsh dictionary and several books in Welsh prior to that. I doubt he would be anywhere as influential, and the Welsh language would probably be significantly diminished by comparison to OTL

 

[Math]

It’s unlikely to establish OTL settlement colonies in North America.

I think England will still go to North America, Spanish control of Texas and California upwards is very tenuous and a Catholic England will not change that, At least the English still arrive in Canada.

 

[Jürgen]

I don't see how one follows from the other. People are still going to have the same desires for wealth and land.

I think England will still go to North America, Spanish control of Texas and California upwards is very tenuous and a Catholic England will not change that, At least the English still arrive in Canada.

If we look at OTL American settlement, Virginia had a similar demographic development as New Netherland until the English Civil War, when they saw a massive influx of Cavaliers refugee. While it’s hard to imagine New England becoming a thing in a Catholic England timeline seeing it’s demographics. Fundamentally the initial colonization of North America dependent on factors which would not have a similar pattern in a Catholic England timeline.

As for how much people talk about the lack of settlers In New Netherlands, it still has 4-5 times the inhabitants of New France at the same time and it saw several times large influx of settlers than Dutch South Africa did. So we could very well have British South, a Dutch North, a French Canada and New England up for grabs.

 

[Jürgen]

In general I also find it unlikely that a Catholic England would not have a strong domestic Protestant movement similar to what we saw in France. Only Spain, Portugal and Italy didn’t see strong Protestant movements, and I think it’s unlikely that England would part of that group of countries. The better question is in which regions of England would Protestantism be strong. Would it rise up in the north inspired by the Scots, would it for max irony have success in Ireland as a counter to the English etc.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

If we look at OTL American settlement, Virginia had a similar demographic development as New Netherland until the English Civil War, when they saw a massive influx of Cavaliers refugee. While it’s hard to imagine New England becoming a thing in a Catholic England timeline seeing it’s demographics. Fundamentally the initial colonization of North America dependent on factors which would not have a similar pattern in a Catholic England timeline.

AIUI the medieval English population was unusually mobile compared to most continental countries (e.g., English parents were more likely to apprentice out their children at a young age). Even if English North America grows somewhat slower without religious refugees to bolster the numbers, I still think it would eventually outstrip its rivals population-wise.

In general I also find it unlikely that a Catholic England would not have a strong domestic Protestant movement similar to what we saw in France. Only Spain, Portugal and Italy didn’t see strong Protestant movements, and I think it’s unlikely that England would part of that group of countries. The better question is in which regions of England would Protestantism be strong. Would it rise up in the north inspired by the Scots, would it for max irony have success in Ireland as a counter to the English etc.

I think "only" is a bit misleading -- "Italy" was in reality a dozen or so countries, as for that matter was Germany, many of whose states had no meaningful Protestant movement. As far as I'm aware there's no particular reason to expect a strong grassroots Protestant movement in England, and per the POD there wouldn't be a top-down imposition of it either.

 

[Jürgen]

AIUI the medieval English population was unusually mobile compared to most continental countries (e.g., English parents were more likely to apprentice out their children at a young age). Even if English North America grows somewhat slower without religious refugees to bolster the numbers, I still think it would eventually outstrip its rivals population-wise.

Seeing that that major English medieval mobility didn’t result in a significant Medieval English diaspora, I find it unlikely that it would suddenly change. The main push factor of English 17th century migration was pretty obvious religious, people who migrated for economic reason ended up in the Caribbean.

I think "only" is a bit misleading -- "Italy" was in reality a dozen or so countries, as for that matter was Germany, many of whose states had no meaningful Protestant movement. As far as I'm aware there's no particular reason to expect a strong grassroots Protestant movement in England, and per the POD there wouldn't be a top-down imposition of it either.

There were Bavaria and Tyrol [1]and that’s it, and they didn’t have a strong Protestant movement because they were economically connected to Italy, as the main trade route between Germany and Italy. Also the idea that Fürstenberg and Lucca should be seen existing in vacuum is fundamentally misunderstanding of pre-national state countries. Each “country” in Italy and Germany was part of greater cultural sphere where ideas flowed.

[1] and they still had “meaningful“ Protestsnt movements, they just happened to be Anabaptist

 

[Math]

In general I also find it unlikely that a Catholic England would not have a strong domestic Protestant movement similar to what we saw in France. Only Spain, Portugal and Italy didn’t see strong Protestant movements, and I think it’s unlikely that England would part of that group of countries. The better question is in which regions of England would Protestantism be strong. Would it rise up in the north inspired by the Scots, would it for max irony have success in Ireland as a counter to the English etc.

England proper would be in the south, but I believe the counter-reformation will leave England like Bavaria and Austria

Seeing that that major English medieval mobility didn’t result in a significant Medieval English diaspora, I find it unlikely that it would suddenly change. The main push factor of English 17th century migration was pretty obvious religious, people who migrated for economic reason ended up in the Caribbean.



There were Bavaria and Tyrol [1]and that’s it, and they didn’t have a strong Protestant movement because they were economically connected to Italy, as the main trade route between Germany and Italy. Also the idea that Fürstenberg and Lucca should be seen existing in vacuum is fundamentally misunderstanding of pre-national state countries. Each “country” in Italy and Germany was part of greater cultural sphere where ideas flowed.

[1] and they still had “meaningful“ Protestsnt movements, they just happened to be Anabaptist

Bavaria and mainly Austria had Protestant movements (I believe that almost half of Austria adhered to Lutheranism) but the counter-reformation was quite effective.

The better question is in which regions of England would Protestantism be strong. Would it rise up in the north inspired by the Scots, would it for max irony have success in Ireland as a counter to the English etc

I believe the South of Scotland could do more, it would depend on how counter-reformation is asserted in There, In Ireland I doubt, even if Protestantism made inroads there, there is a centuries-old Catholic base that would maintain a considerable amount of the population, If Catholics felt in danger they could turn to the church that would turn to Catholic England To assert the counter-reformation.

 

[Math]

Either way a change like this (catholic England) completely changes the world, people like Locke, Hobbes and the people they influenced were butterflyed.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

Seeing that that major English medieval mobility didn’t result in a significant Medieval English diaspora, I find it unlikely that it would suddenly change. The main push factor of English 17th century migration was pretty obvious religious, people who migrated for economic reason ended up in the Caribbean.

Medieval England didn't have huge tracts and almost-uninhabited land available, and other countries with religious minorities (France or the Netherlands, for example) didn't go in for settler colonialism in as a big a way as the English did. Religion was a factor for some groups of colonists, to be sure (the Pilgrim Fathers, for ex.), but on the whole most British settlers in the period 1492-1776 were more drawn by economic and social factors than by religious ones.

There were Bavaria and Tyrol [1]and that’s it, and they didn’t have a strong Protestant movement because they were economically connected to Italy, as the main trade route between Germany and Italy. Also the idea that Fürstenberg and Lucca should be seen existing in vacuum is fundamentally misunderstanding of pre-national state countries. Each “country” in Italy and Germany was part of greater cultural sphere where ideas flowed.

[1] and they still had “meaningful“ Protestsnt movements, they just happened to be Anabaptist

The whole of Western Europe was part of a greater cultural sphere; that's how Protestantism was able to spread so quickly in the first place. But at least if Eamonn Duffy is to be believed, late medieval English Catholicism was in quite good shape, so there's no reason to expect Protestantism to get a particularly large following absent pressure from the top.

 

[Nuraghe]

England proper would be in the south, but I believe the counter-reformation will leave England like Bavaria and Austria

Bavaria and mainly Austria had Protestant movements (I believe that almost half of Austria adhered to Lutheranism) but the counter-reformation was quite effective.

I believe the South of Scotland could do more, it would depend on how counter-reformation is asserted in There, In Ireland I doubt, even if Protestantism made inroads there, there is a centuries-old Catholic base that would maintain a considerable amount of the population, If Catholics felt in danger they could turn to the church that would turn to Catholic England To assert the counter-reformation.

Even without the imposition from above of a reform as happened in Otl, I am of the idea that we will see the spontaneous birth in England of a small but politically quite important Protestant current in the kingdom, mainly located in the South-East ( due to the very important trade relations with Germany, the Baltic and Normandy ( which in OTL was called the little Nuremberg of France ) which can facilitate the diffusion of similar ideas, will certainly make inroads into some areas of the nobility and bourgeoisie of the kingdom ( or at least in those who do not want greater centralization of state power to their detriment or disapprove of real policies ) but nothing too serious that an immediately adopted Counter-Reformation cannot overcome ( after all, almost all of the Habsburg aristocracy had become Lutheran, and then returned to being arch Catholic in Otl ) now there would also be further observations to be made regarding England which remains papist, the first obviously being that the decisions established at the Council of Trent in Otl would also be applied to it ( therefore we will have a conspicuous representation of English curiates , which could be at least on par with the HRE ( therefore around 5 cardinals, which could be more if the English manage to gain control over the Scottish and Irish representation, which would bring London to 8 cardinals ) who could heavily influence future Papal elections ) finally there is the question of the Jus Excluisivae ( i.e. the right of veto in the conclave ), which with the rupture of Henry VIII, ceases as a right of the English monarch ( it always makes me smile that Henry himself didn't even know he could use it, and that no one bothered to inform him of this ) but which perhaps is not lost in this scenario, and allows London to be on a par with the Habsburgs and France, in being able to interfere in an important way in Roman politics, which could also lead it to obtain its own pontiff in the long term ( given that with a third important faction in the curia, the possibilities of breaking the perennial political stalemate between the French and the Habsburg bloc of Otl are many, it cannot be ruled out that a English candidate can be seen as fairly neutral by both parties )