AHC WI:Religiously Tolerant Mary I

This seems rather ASB but what if Mary I of England as religiously tolerant? Apparently, she promised not to persecute Protestants though that may be just a schoolbook legend. In such a scenario, she'd probably marry Edward Courtney. What if?
 
No...

she was too devout before her mother died, she was raised as a catholic, she persisted for years after to deny her sister and brother and Henry's superiority over the church and it was basically kinda on threat of death did she, outwardly, relent a little...Plus being married to Phillip wouldn't have helped

Only way to do this is to get a son for Henry from Catherine of Aragon, prevent that kid from having kids, and then mabye Mary will still get the throne, if she lives long enough, and be tolerant over a still catholic England
 

birdboy2000

Banned
Not a heck of a lot changes.

A lot of protestants wouldn't settle for tolerance, especially as Mary would succeed a protestant king. I think there would still be no shortage of complaining, although Mary won't get the nickname "Bloody".

On the other hand, protestantism isn't nearly well-established enough yet for a Glorious Revolution type scenario. Mary held the throne until her death OTL, and was killed by influenza, not civil war or revolution.

Elizabeth's religious convictions weren't the result of her sister's persecution of protestants, so they'd probably be unchanged. She will still succeed her sister, still be a protestant, and still occasionally have catholics killed for trying to overthrow her.

The one thing I can think of is that the Marian exiles - those protestants who fled to the continent under Mary - don't need to leave. Many of these individuals would play a formative role in Anglicanism, and without a period of exile and the resulting close contact with their counterparts on the continent you might alter the theology of the Anglican church in various ways. Sadly I don't know enough to say what those ways would be.
 
Its complete ASB. Catholicism was too inbreed into her to allow for toleration. Catholicism was part of her cause. Catholicism equaled legitimacy in Mary's mind. The Catholics considered her their legitimate heiress, the child of good Queen Catherine. The Protestants, on the other hand, bastardized her, essentially killed her mother and, in her mind, destroyed England. No way she could be tolerant. Maybe if Henry didn't bastardize her she MIGHT be more tolerant, maybe.

The only real changes that could happen is Mary I wouldn't be known as Bloody Mary. Though we might see reverse toleration, with Catholic's being less hated by some Protestants. If the last Catholic monarch isn't villainized then maybe Mary Queen of Scots wouldn't be seen as such a treat because of her religion. And further down the line, we could possibly see another Catholic King or Queen.
 

Thande

Donor
There was no such thing as religious toleration as we understand it now in the 16th century. If you suggested it to somebody from that era, they would react like you would to someone saying "well some people want this country to be a monarchy, others want it to be a republic, and still others want it to be a military dictatorship. Let's allow it to be all three at once!" It would be an impossible contradiction. Religious identity was part of the basis of the state and the ideological foundation of the people: it was a public matter, not a private one. That was only challenged from the 17th century onwards with the upheavals of the 30 Years' War in Germany meaning personal conscience got into it more: when the principle of Cuius regio, eius religio (i.e. "whatever the king believes, all his subjects are assumed to believe") was charted, it was an acknowledgement of this - back in the 16th century, there was no such term because no-one could conceive of the idea of it being any other way. Basically, the only way a state could contain people of any religion other than the king's religion was if those people were not considered to be 'real' citizens of the state (the most obvious example being Jews; Elizabeth I had Jewish and Muslim doctors despite Jews being 'officially' banned from England, because they weren't considered to be 'real' subjects rather than temporarily visiting foreigners).
 

Ah, but that Central Europe, and doesn't relate to England, Frace or Germany, or it obviously has no bearing on history at all ;)

But can I say; Poland is just a bit more enlightened than its Western neighbors at that point and a head of its time :)

Of course, Poland had a longer history of running a multi-ethnic, multi-faith state at this point in its history, which likely played a factor upon their being tolerant of other denominations when they sprang up.
 
Top