‘The most important reason for the unpopularity of the Personal Rule was religion.’ How far do you agree? Tyranny can be defined as ‘cruelty and injustice in the exercise of authority over others’, yet now in the modern day the period of ruling by King Charles I without calling parliament for eleven years is often called ‘The Eleven Years Tyranny’ by historians. This essay will cover why this might be, by looking at the various factors contributing to the unpopularity of the Personal Rule, the most important of which will become clear to be religion. Other factors that will be covered in this essay include Charles’ methods of raising funds, the policy of ‘thorough’ in Ireland, the fact that Parliament had no way of passing grievances in the …show more content…
Most people were Church of England Anglican and they did not like churches and church proceedings that were in any way ‘popish’ (appeared to be fancy and Catholic). Nevertheless there were two extremes either side of the more popular beliefs; Arminianism and Puritanism. Puritans wanted to purify the practices of the church to make them less extravagant and more godly. Arminians, on the other hand, liked ceremonies, Bishops and obedience to royalty. It is not difficult to guess which branch Charles I had an affinity for. He appointed William Laud, an Arminian, as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633. William Laud, now in what can be seen as the most authorial church role, came up with 5 church aims: uniformity across the country, ‘beauty of holiness’- making churches fit for worship, the eradication of Puritanism, to increase church influence in government, and to restore the wealth of the clergy. The first and second factors, as simple as they may sound, upset the general public because they involved forcing the congregation to contribute towards improvements that they didn’t want, such as a stone alter. The stone alter also upset the gentry, many of whom would be members of parliament, as the alter was moved to the East of the church where the family pew would normally be. Charles was against Puritanism as many wanted to see the episcopacy abolished, which might explain
One monarch who faced limited royal power due to his relationship with parliament was Henry IV. This uneasy relationship was mainly down to the fact that Henry was a usurper, and was exacerbated by his long periods of serious illness later in his reign. Parliament was thus able to exercise a large amount of control over royal power, which is evident in the Long Parliament of 1406, in which debates lasted from March until December. The length of these debates shows us that Henry IV’s unstable relationship had allowed parliament to severely limit his royal power, as he was unable to receive his requested taxation. A king with an amiable relationship with parliament, such as Henry V, and later Edward IV, would be much more secure in their power, as taxation was mostly granted, however their power was also supported more by other factors, such as popularity and finances. Like Henry IV, Henry VI also faced severely limited power due to his relationship with parliament.
The first of these is Religion. Charles came under attack from, in simple terms, the Protestants and the Catholics. He had this attack on him for many different reasons. He was resented by the Catholics, because he was a protestant. To be more precise, he was an Arminian, which was a sector from the protestant side of Christianity. On the other side of the spectrum, he is resented by the puritans, as they see him as too close in his religious views to Catholicism. Furthermore, he is disliked by the puritans as he put restrictions on their preaching and themselves. The puritans were a well organised opposition to Personal rule. The top puritans, linked through family and friends, organised a network of potential opposition to the king and his personal rule. This ‘Godly party’ as they became known, was made up of gentry, traders, lawyers and even lords. This group of powerful and extremely influential people was the most well organised opposition to Charles’ personal rule.
The constant debate over the school systems in America, have yielded a discussion over whether these school systems promote individuality through ones’ schoolwork or if the whole system is set up to conform every student. Some important issues to discuss when looking at schools causing individuality or conformity are school dress codes, rigid school schedules and classes, and little creativity promoted in schools.
In 1534, King Henry VIII formally instigated the English Reformation. He therefore passed the Act of Supremacy, which outlawed the Catholic Church and made him “the only supreme head on earth of the Church of England” (Roark, 68). Puritans were looking for a more Protestant church and received what they wanted. Along with it, came the King’s total control over the Church. This is what the Puritans didn’t want. Puritans believed that ordinary Christians, not a church hierarchy, should control religious life. They wanted a distinct line between government and the Church of England. Puritans also wanted to eliminate the customs of Catholic worship and instead focus on an individual’s relationship with God developed through Bible study, prayer, and introspection (Roark, 68).
Throughout Charles I’s Personal Rule, otherwise known as the ‘Eleven Year Tyranny’, he suffered many problems which all contributed to the failure of his Personal Rule. There are different approaches about the failure of Personal Rule and when it actually ended, especially because by April 1640 Short Parliament was in session. However, because it only lasted 3 weeks, historians tend to use November 1640 as the correct end of the Personal Rule when Long Parliament was called. There was much debate about whether the Personal Rule could have continued as it was, instead people generally believed that it would crumble when the King lost his supporters.
Thoreau, Henry David, and Jeffrey S. Cramer. Walden : A Fully Annotated Edition. New Haven:
One of the key factors that led to the civil war was the contrasting beliefs of King Charles and the parliament. The monarchy believed in the divine rights of kings, explained by Fisher (1994, p335) as a biblically-based belief that the king or queen's authority comes directly from God and that he is not subjected to the demands of the people. On the other hand, the parliament had a strong democratic stance and though they respected and recognized the king's authority, they were constantly desiring and fighting for more rights to power. Although climaxing at the reign of King Charles, their antagonism stretched for centuries long before his birth and much of the power that once belonged to the monarchy had shifted over to the parliament by the time he came into power.
The idea of Individualism can be traced all the way back to England before America’s existence. As we know, individualism has been interpreted in many forms throughout history. The 19th century is no different, taking hold of its own idea of individualism, called transcendentalism. Transcendentalism suggests freedom should not be confined to those focused on money and superficial gains. Instead, people should depend on no one but themselves. This movement focused on “greater individualism against conformity” (Corbett et al.). Heavily influenced by the Romantic period, transcendentalism adopted the belief that reason was more important than logic as Benjamin Franklin has believed. Reason must also include unique emotion and spirit (Corbett et
Conformity is the process of understanding to majority influence and is defined by David Myers (1991) as a change in behavior or belief a result of real or imagined group pressure
Conformity is a concept that has intrigued psychologists for decades; a concept that has been the foundation of numerous studies, books, and that has been subtly woven into the media. Most of the research done on conformity has to do with what can cause conforming behavior and when conforming behavior is most prevalent. There are generally two types of influences that can cause conforming behavior, informational social influences and normative social influence. Both deal with the when and why of conformity in society and what situations typically cause a group or one or two people to conform. The most powerful and dangerous type of conformity is conformity to authority, which can cause people to obey orders that they would normally not follow in any other situation. With that being said, informational social influence can fuel conforming behavior, especially in instances when the situation is a crisis, ambiguous, and when other people in the situation have authority or expertise.
The challenges to the power of the Monarch was by the reign of James I (1603-25) the monarch was faced with an increasing effective Parliament, culminating in the temporary abolition of the monarchy in (1625). Consequently, the monarchy’s powers were eroded by both revolution and by legal challenges, which included the case of Proclamations (1611) , the monarchy could not change the law by proclamation. The law of the land, which required that the law be made by Parliament, limited the prerogative. In the case of Prohibitions Del Roy (1607) the Monarch had no right to act as a judge, and in the case of the Ship Money Case (1637), although th...
When Christians first encounter the idea of creating a spiritual discipline, some almost instantly become overwhelmed with anxiety because they must perform well for God to please Him and get to heaven. I was once one of them and to a point, I still think that way. However, the more focus on the relationship with Jesus and nothing else brings about the desires to want more in terms of spiritual growth. Desires however, do not last if disciplines are not met with a genuine commitment to maintain a fervent relationship with Jesus. For my rule of life, I will pencil in daily life disciplines that fit in the season of life that I am in currently so that God can work in me and I can become Christ like. First, I will commit fifteen minutes to daily prayer with God. Second, I will commit fifteen minutes to daily scripture reading. Third, I will commit to lead, encourage and support my wife by living out the vows that we both agreed to with God. Fourth, I will commit myself to my family in raising my two
On chapter 4 on the textbook, the author explains, “culture provides a member of a society with a common bond, a sense that we see certain facets of society in similar ways. We are living together at all depends on the fact that members of a society share a certain amount of cultural knowledge (Ch4, 132). Individualism and collectivism contribute greatly to the dimension of culture. For example, how many members of the culture define themselves apart from their group memberships. In individualist cultures, people are expected to develop and display their individual personalities and to choose their own affiliations. In collectivist cultures, people are defined and act mostly as a member of a long-term group, such as the family, a religious group, an age cohort, a town, or a profession, among others. This dimension was found to move towards the individualist end of the spectrum with increasing
...teenth century intellects claimed that morality was independent of religion, and that religious authority had no say in the moral dictates of an individual. This sort of thought would eventually sway the public’s view in matters of morality and religion and eliminate the churches influence in society and institution altogether.
Colin Wilson once said, "The Average man is a conformist, accepting miseries and disasters with the stoicism of a cow standing in the rain." A conformist is a person who conforms to accepted behavior or established practices. That means someone who follows others, whether it is about decision making or their attitude. In today 's society I would say that most of the people are conformist, this includes both teenagers and adults. Being a conformist in my opinion can be bad and good for various reasons. If the attitude of the specific person has changed for the better, such as a snobby boy/girl becoming more respectful, that it definitely a positive change. Other people can change their attitude for