atheist or agnostic king during the reformation

During the Protestant reformation had king declares himself a atheist and agnostic .what happens next would there be a major uprising or war .
 
During the Protestant reformation had king declares himself a atheist and agnostic .what happens next would there be a major uprising or war .

That would be dangerous for him. No religious body would be interested in supporting him, so they'd all declare him a usurper. He'd face a lot of assassination attempts.
 
Why should they be King if they have no divine right? Any one could claim their own right over a certain kingdom.

Also the Catholics tried to invade England over the religion of Queen Elizabeth, why would they sit back and see a heretic rule a kingdom without defense from God.

Look at America, after they revolted against the king of England, they kept god as a prominent figure in their constitution.
 
There were some people at the time who were -- or were reputed to be -- atheists; Christopher Marlowe, for example. Still, if you have an atheist ruler, I doubt he'd say so openly, since doing so would alienate a lot of people for no real gain. Most likely, since he doesn't believe in this whole God business, we'd see him use his country's Church simply as a political instrument for consolidating his own power and wealth -- which, to be honest, wouldn't really mark him out from the average European ruler. :p
 
There were some people at the time who were -- or were reputed to be -- atheists; Christopher Marlowe, for example. Still, if you have an atheist ruler, I doubt he'd say so openly, since doing so would alienate a lot of people for no real gain. Most likely, since he doesn't believe in this whole God business, we'd see him use his country's Church simply as a political instrument for consolidating his own power and wealth -- which, to be honest, wouldn't really mark him out from the average European ruler. :p

This.
Being an outspoken atheist at the time was generally dangerous (to be fair, being the wrong kind of theist was more dangerous). Being an outspokenly atheist King would be tantamount to be asking "please depose me".
Religion was generally, with some nuance, seen as a basic ingredient of glue that holds society together. Even if the King was an atheist as a personal belief, he would have no way (and no reason, except willingness to be dethroned; but there were a lot of safer ways to abdicate, like, well, abdicating) to go public about it. I mean, most Kings were crowned in churches, quite often by bishops.
 
During the Protestant reformation had king declares himself a atheist and agnostic .what happens next would there be a major uprising or war .

One of his courtiers stabs him to death, and everyone mourns the "tragic loss" of the king. I'm sure the heir will be questioned about his piety as well.
 
During the Protestant reformation had king declares himself a atheist and agnostic .what happens next would there be a major uprising or war .

Several things to consider:

As other posters have said kings at the time exercised divine right to rule. By being an atheist in those days the king would be essentially saying "I have no more right to be here than anyone else."

In a country that was probably 95% Catholic (at least in public) this would be as popular as eating every baby in the kingdom.

The Church would ban all baptisms, last rites, masses, confessions, marriages, or any other rite until the king was deposed. This means that pretty much everyone in the kingdom who dies before the king is deposed is going to Hell, or at least Purgatory.

Unlike a Protestant king an atheist king can't replace the Church with his own. He lacks the moral authority and since he publicly admits disbelief his Church would be seen as nothing for but a cynical political move.
 
Atheism was very, very unpopular during those times. Not just in terms of its reception, but in terms of how many people were actually atheists. The common thought was that you have to be ignorant to believe there is no God, as scientific evidence and basic observation of the world showed there had to be a creator behind everything. Let alone an atheist King, I don't even know if such a thing would be plausible.
 
Atheism was very, very unpopular during those times. Not just in terms of its reception, but in terms of how many people were actually atheists. The common thought was that you have to be ignorant to believe there is no God, as scientific evidence and basic observation of the world showed there had to be a creator behind everything. Let alone an atheist King, I don't even know if such a thing would be plausible.

Actually would an admitted atheist even be in the line of succession? Wouldn't they just find some way to declare him invalid?
 

FrozenMix

Banned
An atheist in that time would be seen a lot like how 9/11 truthers or flat earth society people are today. As someone who refuses to see evidence put before them, and therefore, is utterly and completely not worthy of intellectual or moral respect. That, combined with opposition from pious members of society, would ensure that the king is tossed from the throne quickly.

However, a secretly atheist king who at least is publicly pious and supportive of the correct religion would be fine.
 
You know, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an atheist ruler, somewhere. We know that atheists existed in medieval Europe; they just didn't advertise it.
 
You know, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an atheist ruler, somewhere. We know that atheists existed in medieval Europe; they just didn't advertise it.

Out of all of the kings in Europe there were probably several, but we'll never really know as they all preferred their stomachs knife-free.
 
That is simply not true. Several of the Founding Fathers weren't even Christians.

It's probably around that time in the 18th Century that such views wouldn't be abhorred by the rest of society. Even in the 19th Century the "Free Thinkers" weren't well received by many people in Europe.
 
And many of the rest were Deists, meaning that they believed that God had created the world and then let it run on its own. Not exactly mainstream Christianity.

"God" not even being a Christian God. The idea was that there was some creator-being who was a distant watchmaker. And you have Jefferson rewriting the Bible to remove the mysticism, and all those quotes about "I find nothing of merit in Christianity" and praising Islam over Christianity, etc to make a AM radio talk show lose its mind.
 
I'm sure there were many atheist, agnostics and otherwise irreligious people ruling during these times. But keep in mind that religion was more that a conscious choice: I'm not saying that people were forced with pikes to go to church (well, in some places...) but it was seen as an integral part of society, the glue that kept many communities together, and a ritual essential for power. I have no doubt that many were either truly devout or outright atheist as many people today, or many things on the middle, but they kept their personal thoughts behind doors and went to church as a part of the social contract, belief aside. I imagine that was the case with most of society: many peasants and bourgeoise were devout, but having a good reputation with the Church earned many benefits for those who weren't.

Also, as one poster said, atheism was very unpopular not only for "heresy" but because the evidence for God's existance was 'clear' to everyone in those times. The Church held most of the knowledge and philosophy from the time, and everything pointed to God. Atheism was viewed more as nihilism or foolishness rather than a conscious choice.
 
You know, I'd be surprised if there wasn't an atheist ruler, somewhere. We know that atheists existed in medieval Europe; they just didn't advertise it.

Modern conceptions of identity were only very formative at the time. There was almost certainly very many men in medieval Europe who didn't take God very seriously as a real thing. They treated the Church very seriously, mostly because the Church was a Very Serious Thing, but they were only believers in the most marginal sense.

The modern conception of 'atheism' owes itself to the 19th century, the 18th at most, something that we can't really talk about as existing before that. A modern can't even begin to understand the role religion and faith played in general life prior to about 1700.
 
Top