• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How important was religion in the disputes between Charles I and his opponents in the period from 1640-1642?

Extracts from this document...


How important was religion in the disputes between Charles I and his opponents in the period from 1640-1642? There were many different factors such as religion, the Grand Remonstrance, Irish Rebellion and other factors, which created much opposition against Charles I. In this essay I will discuss further the factors and how important they were in the disputes between Charles I and his opponents. Religion was one of many factors that caused disputes between Charles and his opponents. The changes introduced by Charles and Archbishop Laud in the church had created widespread and apparently united opposition. A petition was made which called for the reversal of Laud's reforms and the abolition of bishops governing the church but nothing was resolved. Later there was widespread unpopularity of the Laudian bishops. Most wanted the reforms made by Laud to be abolished and they wanted to restore a Protestant church but few were committed to any Presbyterian model and even fewer to the abolition of bishops. In January 1641 Charles removed the bishops from the Privy Council, which meant they had a less powerful role in administration and government. ...read more.


Some however were unwilling to entrust such an army to the King whom they feared might be helping the revels and might even use against the army. This made some MP's very angry as it was a insult to the king as it was an infringement of the King's powers. We can see here that the King already had opposition as many people didn't trust him but he still had some supporters. Any attempt to make further inroads into the royal prerogative would undoubtedly create divisions in the Parliament that the opposition feared. On 22 November 1641 Pym introduced a Grand Remonstrance to the King, which was another factor that was important in the disputes between the King and his opponents. This reviewed the events of the previous year and reminded the House what had been achieved before setting out challenges that remained. Later a Militia Bill providing an army for Ireland was introduced, with an amendment proposing that Parliament should be given the right to approve the King's choice of commander. ...read more.


The opposition planned to formulate new demands and place further restrictions on the King. They put forward a list of ten points but the King did not agree to them. MP's came with a conviction that the King had overstepped his powers and infringed both law and rights of Parliament. They united in demanding the removal of such abuses and securing parliaments for the future. This was quite an important factor as we can see that his Parliament was not happy with him and this created disputes between Charles and his opposition. To conclude I do think that religion was an important factor in the disputes between Charles I and his opposition but I think that the other factors were important as well. I think that religion played the biggest part in the disputes between the King and his opposition as it was linked to all the factors for instance the Irish Rebellion was to do with the Catholics and Protestants but I do think that the other factors do have some importance in the disputes between Charles and his opposition as well. ?? ?? ?? ?? Ashanthi de Silva 12/3 Charles I ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level British History: Monarchy & Politics essays

  1. How far was Parliament more responsible than Charles for the breakdown of their relationship ...

    The first cause of a division was with the presentation of the 'Root and Branch Petition' in December 1640 to Parliament. It called for the abolition of bishops, an issue over which MPs took two distinct viewpoints - either strongly supporting or strongly opposing it.

  2. In 1640 most MP's wanted and expected redress of grievances and a settlement of ...

    could not happen again by securing the future of Parliament, and disposing of the king's evil councillors, particularly Laud and Strafford. When united, the Long Parliament achieved many aims such as a Triennial Act that ensured Parliament would definitely be called every three years and the removal of the king's

  1. To what extent had Catholic opposition to religious changes disappeared by 1640?

    Therefore this time, as Guy suggests, there was little co-operation between the masses and the gentry, suggesting even if the rebellions had been motivated predominantly by religion they were still not a sufficiently co-ordinated or threatening force. The 1552 Prayer Book did not stir much Catholic opposition, even though it changed the appearance of churches outwardly.

  2. How important was politics & the power struggle in disputes between Charles & his ...

    Another was how his advisors mainly used the king as their own puppet what had a massive amount of power 'Charles was the perfect puppet for a bad advisor' examples of this was how laud used the power given to him by the king to put in massive unpopular moves in religion (book of sports ect..)

  1. The roles and leadership of Charles Stuart and John Pym in the English Civil ...

    Then there was the 'War group', led by Sir Henry Vane, Sir Arthur Haselrig and the republican Henry Marten. This group openly sought a total victory against the Royalists and wanted to severely reduce the kings powers. Then, the middle group between these two extremes was led by John Pym

  2. This essay examines the actions of Charles VII in relation to events pertaining to ...

    they worried her assertion might be perceived as an indication of a betrayal to the agreement.36 Several scholars believe that Joan of Arc would have been successful at Paris had she been given a sufficient amount of time and support.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work