Elizabeth I and the Catholic Church (a brief history)
If you’re not that religious and you’ve often wondered why England has many Catholic churches and many Church of England buildings, here is a quick lesson on why. It’s all to do with Henry VIII (a not very nice man) who replaced the Pope with himself as head of England’s church, in order to gain a divorce and remarry, in order to produce a son and heir.
Along the way he married six times, and sometimes had his wives beheaded. His son Edward VI reigned from just age 9 (managed by a regency council) but after his early death (likely from TB) at age 15, Lady Jane Grey ruled followed by Mary I (daughter of Catherine of Aragon).
Then Elizabeth I took over, who was the daughter of Henry VIII and his executed second wife Anne Boleyn. She had many people executed (including her Catholic cousin Mary Queen of Scots) and over 200 Catholic priests, seeing this as a threat to her authority. She went on to found what is now the Church of England.
So you can see there is a very bloody and warring history, although of course these days, things are much calmer. But although Catholics can now marry into royalty, the monarch must still be a Protestant. If in theory Prince William decided to convert, he and any fellow Catholic descendants would have to abdicate, and the next Protestant down the line would become monarch. It’s all a bit bonkers really.
How Elizabeth I changed religion in England
In 1558, Elizabeth I had inherited religious chaos, due to her father. Nuns and monks had been murdered, and all their treasures stolen from monasteries and convents. The country had swung from Catholic to Protestant, then back to Catholic again.
On passing an Act of parliament in 1559, all that changed, and she called herself Supreme Governor, to set the pattern of worship, at a time when many people thought the monarch was God’s representative on earth.
Why the Catholic Church became a big threat
If you’ve ever met any devout Roman Catholics, you likely know that they would rather die than become protestant, and that’s what happened, with many being killed, rather than give up their beliefs. In their minds, they answered to a higher power.
In 1570, Pope Pius V excommunicated Elizabeth I from the Catholic church, this just made things worse. Catholics who had attended Church of England services began to refuse, and faced fines. They attended secret Mass and priests faced arrest (as did households who hid them).
Are there are Catholic royals in England?
The best known was the lovely Duchess of Kent, who converted to the Roman Catholic faith in 1994. Her funeral in 2025 was the first for a royal in a Catholic church, since the reformation.
She was the kind lady who after suffering from depression, would go off to volunteer for the Samaritans in her spare time. She worked directly on the phones in central London. Many also remember her for giving Jana Novotna a hug, when she burst into tears after losing a Wimbledon final (she did eventually win, but sadly died of cancer soon after, at just 49).
Her son is a Roman Catholic, as are his children (Lady Marina Windsor was recently removed from the line of succession, after being confirmed into the Roman Catholic Church). A passionate environmentalist, she is executive of The Big Give, which funds small charity campaigns for communities.
Yet abroad, small principalities like Monaco and Liechtenstein are run by tiny yet hugely popular Catholic royal families. How things change over the border!
Does King Charles have ‘divine right’ to rule?
Well, it’s more Parliament. Back in the day, people thought literally that our Monarch was God’s representative on Earth (a bit like some people believe Pope Leo is, even though there are all kinds of controversies – abuse, mass wealth, bull-fights etc).
But these days King Charles is pretty affable with all major religions, and unlikely to rock the boat, if only to save the monarchy from going under.
Nowhere in the bible does it say that Charles III has the right to rule or reign. In fact no one has said he has the right to rule, and he doesn’t claim that right. He does however have the right to reign, and that right was conferred on him by parliament.
His distant ancestor Charles I believed he had the divine right to rule because of some Old Testament verses on kingship. Parliament disabused him of that notion and cut off his head. I am confident that the current Charles holds no such ambition. Contributor on Quora
