Author Topic: Was Shakespeare a Catholic? (Read 4065 times)

Lighthouse · « **Reply #5 on:** April 23, 2011, 10:41:49 PM »

Thanks for reminding me. If you want to study a Catholic life in Protestant England, you might wish to read about William Byrd, the polyphonic composer. Apparently he was able to lead a semi-public life without losing his head.

But every Passiontime I try to listen to his Ave Verum Corpus at least once. You can hear it at the link below, but I don't think it's a very good rendering.

Click on the side link to Songs of Silence and then choose the song from the list.

Easter is soon upon us!

William Byrd

Elizabeth · « **Reply #6 on:** April 23, 2011, 11:23:36 PM »

Lighthouse, for William Byrd, why not try the Tallis Scholars?

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 25, 2011, 03:19:13 AM »

Quote from: Hobbledehoy

Quote from: roscoe
My understanding is that Shakespere had Catholic sentiments but one had to be very careful during those times. Some Catholics would make a show of going to Prot church but would remain secretly Roman.

Years ago, after studying his Second Tetralogy (Richard II, Henry IV, Pt. 1, Henry IV, Pt. 2, and Henry V), I got an impression similar to Roscoe's. Shakespeare seems to have had an intense inner conflict regarding the authority of the Tudors who had politically "overthrown" [for all intents and purposes] the greatest authority known to English Christendom, i. e., the Roman Pontiff, the same authority that had tacitly sanctioned the reign of the Tutors and previous English kings [for, up until the English "Reformation," they were crowned according to the rites of the Roman Pontifical by an Archbishop whose jurisdiction was given by the Pope]. If such a great authority can be so easily demolished, what stability, then, could the authority of the monarchy itself have or claim to have.

This impression I felt the strongest after I read Richard II, which is ultimately a lyrical and theatrical commentary on the question of how lawful authority is determined and the complex ramifications of a bad ruler and subsequent usurpation.

He availed himself of tropes, metaphors, allusions and archetypes that hearkened back to English Catholic heritage, but this may have been merely a vestigial cultural marks that the Anglican transmogrification of England could not erase (nor did it ever, just ask the "High-Church" Anglicans). Though I would not readily dismiss these as evidence that he had some Catholic leanings.

I think he was a very conflicted individual, especially when it came to politics and religion. He may have had a nostalgia, a vitiated certainty, or even a conditional eagerness to embrace the faith, but he never showed in his writings the fruits usually associated with a supernaturally infused faith.

Exquisite posting... I really enjoy your posts.

Lighthouse · « **Reply #8 on:** April 25, 2011, 03:35:35 PM »

Quote

Exquisite posting... I really enjoy your posts.

Sorry, I cry foul on "vitiated certainty" and "conditional eagerness".

These are not oxymorons; they are two adjectives sent out to eagerly vitiate two nouns. I am passionately hesitant to accept them.

:judge:

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #9 on:** April 25, 2011, 11:54:01 PM »

Quote from: PartyIsOver221

Exquisite posting... I really enjoy your posts.

Thank you kindly, good sir. Happy Paschaltide to you and yours.

Quote from: Lighthouse

Sorry, I cry foul on "vitiated certainty" and "conditional eagerness".

These are not oxymorons; they are two adjectives sent out to eagerly vitiate two nouns. I am passionately hesitant to accept them.

It is a vehement passivity that renders me willingly reluctant to deny assent to this judgment.

Uh, speaking about William Byrd, someone sent me this link as a Paschal greeting e-card:

Happy Paschaltide!