Fires of Faith: Catholic England under Mary Tudor

by Eamon Duffy (Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 2009)

As he had promised, Prof. Eamon Duffy has addressed the era of the Catholic restoration under Queen Mary in his new book Fires of Faith: Catholic England under Queen Mary Tudor. We can say that all interested in the history of Catholicism in 16th century England have been eagerly awaiting this work. They will not be disappointed. I think, though, that two caveats are appropriate.

First, as Prof. Duffy himself emphasizes, this is not at all a general history of the reign of Queen Mary or even of the Catholic restoration under Queen Mary. Rather, Duffy concentrates on several limited if very important topics: the role of Cardinal Pole, the relation of the Marian restoration to the Catholic Counterreformation, the role of preaching and publicity and of course, the burnings of heretics. One unfortunate side effect of the book’s selective nature is that the length of text devoted to the campaign against heresy subtly undercuts the author’s attempt to prove that Queen Mary’s policy of repression was more than mere reliance on physical force.

Second, although well written and accessible to the non-specialist public, this short work presupposes that the reader possesses a detailed knowledge of English and European history and religion in the period 1530-1570. Given the present state of education, that is certainly a shaky assumption at least on this side of the Atlantic. For example, this book refers in passing several times to the fact that Philip II of Spain was the husband of Queen Mary: that may come as a surprise to the average reader. Duffy also seems to assume the reader has some familiarity with Cardinal Pole’s interaction with the Council of Trent and with several Popes – including “mad, bad” Paul IV.

Within its stated scope, though, Fires of Faith is superb. Perhaps its greatest accomplishment is to bring clarity to the personality and role of Cardinal Pole. He stands out as the guiding figure of the restoration, providing direction Queen Mary at almost every step – including the actions against heretics. Cardinal Pole drew on the early Catholic Counter Reformation for his policies; the measures of Queen Mary in turn served as a model for subsequent actions on the continent.

The religious regime of Queen Mary is shown to have had strong intellectual underpinnings. The queen and her advisors were well aware of the necessity of good preaching and of “publicity.” They took great pains to make sure that clear explanations of the restored faith were disseminated throughout the country.

This regime included the burnings. Prof, Duffy dutifully and on several occasions asserts his own horror at killing others for their faith – so incomprehensible to modern man. I don’t think Prof. Duffy needs to be so defensive before contemporary public opinion. It seems to me that modern man is preeminently qualified to understand drastic actions against a hated and feared enemy. After all, leaving aside the actions of 20th century totalitarian states, which everyone (now) condemns, the bombings of Hiroshima, Tokyo, Hamburg and Dresden are routinely praised and justified to the present day. Moreover, these atrocities involved the burning of tens and hundreds of thousands of people who were almost all “innocent” in contrast to the few hundred punished with death under Mary.

Duffy takes us through the process of the repression of heresy in detail: the search for the heretics, the trials, the unsettling details of the burnings and their accompanying “theater” of denunciation, preaching and crowd participation (either support or condemnation). It is evident from Duffy’s narrative that almost all those condemned were guilty as charged -the judges often bent over backwards to avoid imposing punishment . It is also clear from the location and class of the victims that Protestantism still was the faith of a distinct minority in England of the 1550’s.

What, however, is the significance of the experience of the Marian restoration for the Catholic today? Especially for the Traditionalist Catholic, who, with some justification, views the actions of the present pontificate as the start of a restoration of the integral Catholic faith? The comparison may be disappointing for Traditionalists. Queen Mary, Cardinal Pole and their associates had a comprehensive vision for restoration. In just 5 years, they succeeded at least in initiating the implementation of almost all these measures – and is some cases much more than that. Liturgical, musical and artistic renewal was of course critical. The Marian restoration, however, also entailed the complete rebuilding of the personnel of the two universities. In a process of careful selection, the episcopate and other key ecclesiastical positions were renewed with trained theologians instead of lawyers and politicians. These actions bore fruit in the years of repression that followed under Elizabeth. As noted, great pains were taken to disseminate sermons and other materials with which the clergy could explain the restored religion. As we have see, of course, there also were firm sanctions against open dissenters.

We have seen little of this yet under Pope Benedict. The Pope has undoubtedly imitated a dramatic renewal of the liturgy. He has reemphasized the role of beauty, art and music. In the liturgy, as in other areas, Pope Benedict has emphasized the “hermeneutic of continuity” though his own preaching and writing.

On the other hand, no effort has been made to change the direction or composition of the episcopate or the Vatican. Reform of Catholic universities and religious orders is nonexistent. The message of Pope Benedict is often lost in a mass of confusing and contradictory actions and statements by the hierarchy and the Vatican itself. Finally, I would agree that we are far removed from an era of capital punishment for heresy, but unacceptable statements by scholars, bishops, cardinals, functionaries of the Vatican and even members of the pope’s own personal staff meet hardly ever with verbal reproof – let alone removal from positions of authority.

The Marian restoration did not survive the nearly simultaneous death of Queen Mary and Cardinal Pole. Yet the consequences of their renewal of the hierarchy and the universities laid the foundation for Catholic recusancy under Elizabeth. Their abortive restoration served as the blueprint for the more permanent achievements of other actors in the emerging Catholic restoration. It was in the much-maligned reign of Queen Mary that the Catholic Counter Reformation first acquired definite form.

(Professor Duffy will be speaking at Yale University today on the subject of this book).