I assure you I wasn’t trying to masquerade as you, and I am truly sorry if I have caused you any embarrassment.

No worries, Jane O. Thanks for your supportive comments early on, by the way.

And I do believe you’ve started, or escalated, a thread truly unique on this forum! Who’d have thought it would lead to in-depth discussion of Tudor ecclesiastical politics? It’s been fascinating reading, and I’ve certainly learned a thing or two.

In history, the British Isles are refered to as such, as far back as 1522 when Waldseemuller mapped the islands as “Insvia Britani.”

The British Isles have existed in their present form since the Ice Age, and are described as such in various accounts from the Romans onwards.
The British Isles is a geographical description, as is “Europe” and “North America.” England, Scotland, Ireland, Ulster and Wales are political entities, and the United Kingdom currently describes England, Scotland, Ulster and Wales.
As a political entity, the United Kingdom, with a monarch and a constitution in common has only been in existence since 1702. Before that date, even when the countries have had a monarch in common, he was officially described as “James I and VI” and “Charles I and I” because until that date, Scotland was a separate country. Politically speaking.

Definitely not the British Isles at this stage. England and Wales only. Scotland didn’t unite with England until 1702

In history, the British Isles are refered to as such, as far back as 1522 when Waldseemuller mapped the islands as “Insvia Britani.”

I don’t believe Henry the VIII considered himself Roman Catholic after his divine order of ‘monarch as head of the church’ in the British Isles, replacing the Pope. I believe he saw himself as head of a church based on apostolic doctrine. His daughter, Mary was pro Catholic but I deem that due to her mother’s influence and religious advisors. As I see it, the political lean for Elizabeth to take the British throne was to prevent accusations of treason for the previously patriotic Anglican converts under her father’s rule. There is further challenge with regard Ireland and political vs religious sides, resulting in the Republic of Ireland and the UK ruled Northern Ireland. Another topic altogether, isn’t it.

He saw himself as head of the Catholic Church in England, but no longer a Roman Catholic. While reformers saw it as their ‘in,’ he remained firm and stuck to Catholic doctrine. I think he always planned to reconcile with Rome, perhaps when the Pope who was Queen Katherine’s nerphew had died, but we’ll never know. Mary returned to Rome and acknowledged the supremacy of Rome, even though her brother, Edward VI, had officially turned England Protestant.
Definitely not the British Isles at this stage. England and Wales only. Scotland didn’t unite with England until 1702

Tobin, you have my sincere apologies. My second post was of some use to you so I am slightly relieved but would like to offer you a RC viewpoint privately, if you wish. Having visited RC churches in many parts of the world, including a remote village in the Sierra Madre, I’ve found various differences (some subtle, some not so) depending on the country, the order and sometimes, the preferences of a rural parish priest. I have a rather extraordinarly diverse RC background and can provide some insight if you like.

MS Jones, too funny! And it did seem clear, didn’t it, the parchments should have been handed over to authorities and holding them from the Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia was illegal. Someone had mentioned defrocking, so I thought to add Father Stokes wouldn’t face excommunication except for violation of Canon Law. I just wondered if the priest told the whole truth to his bishop, but have a pretty good idea why Father Stokes would withhold the discovery until he read the old documents. In spite of that, it seems to me the priest would be feeling remorse at not confessing everything to his bishop.

Jane O, no worries please. It was my faux pas that created the misunderstanding. Although I continue to maintain Catholic churches architecturally refer to the nave as any area south of the altar and chancel. Worshippers fill the transepts at times of celebration and direct reference is made to nave including the transepts in the Catholic Encyclopedia. I admit to dispensations for daily Mass in poorly attended cathedrals that it may be held at a side altar prepared to hold the tabernacle, but a rural church in Mexico is not a NYC cathedral.

Lynne, I adore the Tudor period as well and have a special interest in Henry VIII and his creation of the Anglican Church, as I am a Catholic born in England. I don’t believe Henry the VIII considered himself Roman Catholic after his divine order of ‘monarch as head of the church’ in the British Isles, replacing the Pope. I believe he saw himself as head of a church based on apostolic doctrine. His daughter, Mary was pro Catholic but I deem that due to her mother’s influence and religious advisors. As I see it, the political lean for Elizabeth to take the British throne was to prevent accusations of treason for the previously patriotic Anglican converts under her father’s rule. There is further challenge with regard Ireland and political vs religious sides, resulting in the Republic of Ireland and the UK ruled Northern Ireland. Another topic altogether, isn’t it.

I very much enjoyed your setting descriptions. Very vivid. But I felt there was a bit too much of it – I was much more interested in finding out more about the illegal activity he was about to engage in – and what would incent a Father to do whatever it is he’s about to do.

I was also a little confused by the ‘earthly law’ phrase. Being that the character who’s head we’re in is a member of the clergy, I took it to mean spiritual or religious law.

Yes, thank you, Lynne. I was just trying to simplify.

Sigh. I know, it’s me, not you. I’m obsessed by the Tudor age. Never managed to write a novel set in the period, though.