Rorate Caeli

Good Queen Mary


Procl.: 19 Iulii MDLIII
† 17 Nov. MDLVIII

A Queen filled with love

The use of the rod can actually be a service of love. Today we can see that it has nothing to do with love ... if heresy is allowed to spread and the faith twisted and chipped away, as if it were something that we ourselves had invented. As if it were no longer God’s gift, the precious pearl which we cannot let be taken from us.
Benedict XVI
June 11, 2010

[Our regular feature in honor of Mary, Queen of England and Ireland, Queen Consort of Spain and its possessions: May she rest in peace.]

24 comments:

John (Ad Orientem) said...

Memory eternal.

GQRep said...

This is an awesome quote from Pope Benedict XVI. Too bad it was last year though.

But what actions has there been from him to follow up on these surprisingly strong words?

何もない = Nothing.

Peterman said...

"Queen of Ireland"

Good as she was the sound of that irks me. The Irish had our own noble families thank you very much, no English need apply.

Jordanes551 said...

Peterman, strictly speaking, though she was the English monarch, ethnically she was Welsh.

In addition, even if one does not accept the legitimacy of the 1541 act of the Irish Parliament granting her father Henry VIII the title of King of Ireland, the English monarch had long held the Lordship of Ireland, lawful liege of all the Irish nobility and native royal families.

Peterman said...

Yes Jordanes, this one in particular does not accept the Crown of Ireland act of 1542 whereby (excommunicated) Henry VIII declared himself and his successors "kings" of Ireland. The Catholic monarchs of Europe and the Pope also refused to recognize a protestant heretic as "King" of Ireland.

Those gaelic families beyond the diminished Pale didn't pay too much attention to the english "lordship"

Jordanes551 said...

Those gaelic families beyond the diminished Pale didn't pay too much attention to the english "lordship"

Which tells us nothing about whether or not the papally-bestowed Lordship was legitimate. It obviously was.

It was the Irish Parliament that granted the kingship to Henry -- he didn't just declare himself King of Ireland. (Henry lost the Lordship of Ireland, a papal fiefdom, when he abandoned the Catholic faith, but the 1541 kingship is a different animal politically.) And while it's true that the Catholic monarchs as the pope did not at that time recognise the 1541 kingship, eventually the pope did acquiesce to it -- nor did the pope make any moves against Mary I of England for calling herself Queen of Ireland. Had the English crown not fallen into the hands of the heretical bastard Elizabeth Boleyn but instead gone to the rightful heiress Mary Stewart, papal recognition of the Kingship of Ireland may well have come sooner.

Long-Skirts said...

Peterman said:

"this one in particular does not accept the Crown of Ireland act of 1542 whereby (excommunicated) Henry VIII declared himself and his successors "kings" of Ireland"

...wrote this several yrs. ago on 4th of July. In my opinion the world is Irish or wants to be - Catholic...or SHOULD be! ;-)

FOURTH OF JULY

Happy Fourth!
Happy Fourth!
Always a Catholic
Firtht of courth.

Happy Fourth
And I say – eth
We’re no descent
Of Henry the eigh – eth!

Happy Fourth
U – S – A
Priests say Latin
Mass each day!

Happy Fourth!
“Latin what??!!”
A firecracker
Up Henry’s…

But – Happy Fourth
Hank’s in his grave
The One, True, Faith
Still frees the brave,

So Happy Fourth
Of God’s July
In the U – S – A
A Catholic I’ll die!

Anthony said...

She was NOT the Queen of Ireland despite what the english may claim! The Irish would have accepted a Scots Queen, after all, the Scots and the Irish are the same people and she would not have been the first Scot to sit on the Irish throne, but they would NEVER, NEVER accept an English monarch.

TOM said...

You seem to have forgotten her claim to be Queen of France. The loss of Calais, she said, was marked on her heart, but she kept the French fleur-de-lys on her escutcheon.

Questions could be asked also about the power of an English Pope to give Ireland away to someone, and of the acceptability of the Dublin parliament representing only a minority of the inhabitants as having power to confer kingship over the country.

Perhaps nothing can be definitively concluded one way or another. But please let us have our sport.

I am not Spartacus said...

As an Irish-Injun Catholic who loves to get drunk on St. Paddys's Day and scalp Protestants, I must write that I am really enjoying the comments section today :)

New Catholic said...

"You seem to have forgotten her claim to be Queen of France."

We didn't.

shane said...

"Those gaelic families beyond the diminished Pale didn't pay too much attention to the english 'lordship'"

They didn't take it seriously because, as Art Cosgrove showed in his book on Late Medieval Ireland, it was a legal fiction outside of the Pale (which itself had by that stage become increasingly Gaelicised - much to the regret of Richard Stanyhurst!) than a constitutional reality, comparable to the way monarchs of England (including Queen Mary), and subsequently Great Britain, continued to include France in their royal style up until George III. While the Kings of England did style themselves as Lords of Ireland (with some exceptions, including Henry III's son Edward, who never used that title), there is no mention ever made in any official records from that era of a 'Lordship of Ireland'; Ireland is simply always referred to as 'terra Hibernie' - the land of Ireland. (Though it should be said that mention is frequently made of Ireland as a Kingdom in the thirteenth century, including by Giraldus Cambrensis.) The 1541 Parliament (which was composed of as many as 8 sessions) Jordanes refers to 'upgraded' (so to speak) Henry VIII to King. The account by Sir Anthony St. Leger records the attendance of "2 Earls, 3 Vicomtes, 16 Barons, 2 Archbishops, 12 Bishops, Donnoghe O'Brien, and the Doctor O'Nolan and a Bishop, Deputies assigned by the Greate O'Brien to be for him in the Parliment, the great Orayly [O'Reilly - shane] with many other Irishe capytains; and the Common House, wherein are divers knights, and many gentlemen of faier possessions." In retrospect I suppose it's not hard to discern the motives for the Gaelic lords: they had been outside the scope of English law and wanted to gain the acceptance of their rule and possessions by the English crown, so as to remove a potential threat. (The year 1541 also saw the English crown ennoble its first Gaelic peer --- Barnaby MacGillapatrick.)

Queen Mary's reputation in Ireland has historically been very, very negative, not because she was a Tudor but because of her (largely unsuccessful) Plantation of Laois and Offaly, which arguably paved the way for the Stuart plantations. After her death, Pope Gregory XIII did write to King Philip II a few times urging him to retake Ireland. That had nothing to do with his connection to Mary, but because of lobbying by the Irish nobles (example). (Even after the defeat of the Spanish Armada, similar petitions and appeals to his successors were made by exiled Irish prelates and nobles throughout the course of the 17th century - example.)

ATW said...

Good Queen Mary, indeed.

Joe O'B said...

Excuse me - is this a private fight or can anybody join in?

thetimman said...

May I recommend to mark the occasion reading Robert Hugh Benson's "The Queen's Tragedy", if you haven't already?

Athelstane said...

Hello Jordanes,

Peterman, strictly speaking, though she was the English monarch, ethnically she was Welsh.

Well, if we want to be technical about it, she was a quarter welsh (through grandfather Henry VII), a quarter English (through grandmother Elizabeth of York), and half Spanish (on her maternal side, through grandparents Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain), ethnically.

But it's true that, royal intermarrying notwithstanding, the Tudors thought of themselves as Welsh, more or less.

Benson aside, I also recommend the chapter in Eamon Duffy's Stripping of the Altars dealing with Queen Mary's religious settlement. Whatever we may think of her use of the stake for heretics (which is chiefly known for producing Foxe's Book of Martyrs now), Duffy paints a portrait of a very thoughtful, complex, and measured effort to restore the Catholic faith in England quite at odds with the unfortunate popular (Whig) portrait of her as "Bloody Mary." And it looked like a very promising effort too, had she been granted a reasonably full life on the throne.

GQ Rep said...

Queen Mary has generally recieved very bad press, because the historical interpretation and analysis of her life and reign has largely come from Protestant British scholars, who have a natural predisposition to be anti-Catholic.

I have the very old, PBS series "Elizabeth R" (1972) on VHS, given to me by a friend. The series is, of course, supposed to be a glorification of "Good Queen Bess". The small part on tape One dealing with Queen Mary is portrayed very well by the actress. Glenda Jackson (is she still living??), portrays Elizabeth throughout.
Mary comes off as a very devout and even saintly Queen. That of course was not the intent of the series producers, but the small part given to her highlights her devout Catholicism and desire to restore England to the true Faith.
Though it was not intended of course, Elizabeth in her posturings and dealings with the Court of Queen Mary and her relationship with the Queen, her sister, comes off as a two-faced, hypocritical and scheming witch. Which of course in real life is exactly what Queen Elizabeth was!!

Queen Mary tried to deal with her Protestant half-sister in good faith. Elizabeth was always the backstabber, just waiting for Mary to die so she could reign.

Queen Mary made one mistake in her life, and that was not to have her "loyal sister" Elizabeth exiled for life, or executed as a traitor that she indeed was.

Jordanes551 said...

Questions could be asked also about the power of an English Pope to give Ireland away to someone,

Perhaps, but in those days the pope's authority in such political matters involving Christian kingdoms was not especially controversial.

I read once that the Irish kings and princes expected the English king to act like an ard ri, with no direct authority in the several major and minor kingdoms in Ireland, and were not at all happy to find out that the English monarch whom the pope had declared to be their feudal overlord had rather different ideas.

and of the acceptability of the Dublin parliament representing only a minority of the inhabitants as having power to confer kingship over the country.

I'm inclined to think the parliament was representative enough, given the feudal culture and attendant political theories of the day.

But I also think its obvious that it would have been better for the Irish and for the English if the English monarch had never been proclaimed King of Ireland, not only due to the preferability that a people govern their own affairs rather than be ruled by a foreign prince, but most especially due to the inevitable religious consequences that infested Ireland with Protestant heretics who straightaway began outrageously to treat the Irish as foreigners (and worse) in their own country.

HSE said...

Tridentine Mass = Precious Pearl

Jordanes551 said...

Well, if we want to be technical about it, she was a quarter welsh (through grandfather Henry VII), a quarter English (through grandmother Elizabeth of York), and half Spanish (on her maternal side, through grandparents Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain), ethnically.

Genetically, not ethnically, because:

But it's true that, royal intermarrying notwithstanding, the Tudors thought of themselves as Welsh, more or less.

****

Queen Mary made one mistake in her life, and that was not to have her "loyal sister" Elizabeth exiled for life, or executed as a traitor that she indeed was.

Absolutely agree.

Peterman said...

Joe O'B, I'm an O'C, mother was a O'D and you know you're more than welcome to get in on an Irish fight any day of the week, twice on Sunday.

Peterman said...

Jordanes, I did post an full rebuttal to your incorrect arguments on Ireland and Henry V but it was apparently too long because it wasn't published. In summary the clan chiefs represented at the 1541 Parliament had no jurisdiction to vote Henry "King of Ireland". When these chiefs returned home they were sacked and even jailed.

No authority under Brehon law and the English "lordship" was only over the ever decreasing pale.

Frederick Oakeley said...

I wonder could we put the Irish issue aside just for long enough to say thank you for reminding us all of a Queen whose death was mourned throughout England. Her sister spent the whole of her reign trying to eradicate Mary's real reputation, replacing it with the 'bloody Mary' image of the Protestant propagandists. May she rest in peace.

Maureen said...

Regarding the coin pictured at the beginning of this post -- A notable occurrence during Queen Mary's reign is currency reform. The previous reigns of Henry and Edward featured devaluations of the currency which resulted in inflation and hardship for the poor. By reforming the currency, prices fell by about 1/3.