Talk:Reginald Pole
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Reginald Pole is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as b-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Anglicanism To-do:
|
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
Contents |
[edit] Burning
I was a bit shocked to see that this page had existed for years without a single mention of Cardinal Pole's (major) share in the persecution and burning of Protestants, which is by any standard the most important thing which he did. I just came across this aticle by chance and added a reference, it should have been done long ago (when the article was first written, actually!). Adam keller 06:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Scholarship
I think a work of great scholarship should be added to the bibliography of Reginald Pole, namely, Thomas F. Mayer, Reginald Pole: Prince & Prophet (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)[Roy H. Piovesana, 11 September 2006]
Is there any explanation in the book for the odd coincidence of his death just after the queen's? That deserves some comment - especially since it turned out to be so convenient considering how vulnerable he would have become to the attacks of his enemies once Elizabeth was queen. Was he in poor health or could he have been poisoned?--AssegaiAli 13:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bias
This article is strange. Some points make him look like a saint, others like a demon. Pole was very much a man of his time with all the positives and negatives that went along with that epoch. I will work hard to balance this article and I ask others to work with me to that end.SECisek 09:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Last Roman Catholic archbishop of Canterbury
In this Vatican document Archbishop Coggan is always refered to as the 'archbishop of Canterbury'. He may or may not be a priest in the eyes of Rome, but he is certainly the archbishop of Canterbury in the opinion of the pope. -- SECisek 15:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removed text.
I removed the following, because it's so polemical in tone and needs reffing anyway.
- Pole shares responsibility for these persecutions and mass burning of Protestants which became the norm during Mary's reign and - contrary to his intention - contributed to making the Roman Catholic Church hated for many generations in England.
If you want to replace, please do a proper job and show Pole's role in burnings, and also some info about burnings. As far as I remember (and i'm no expert), Mary and Elizabeth killed approx same numbers for religious reasons, Elizabeth over a longer period. So surely then the Church of England was hated for many generations in England... Er... JackyR | Talk 23:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- This is not really contested material. It is quite easily cited as the scholarship is in agreement with this assesment. Mary and Elizabeth did kill approx. the same number of people but Mary did in 3 years while Elizabth spread it out over 40. Elizabeth had better P.R., and could claim patriotism for her cause after her excommunication in 1570. With the threat of the Armada Roman Catholicism was equated with the worst forms of treason. If you really need a more in depth explanation on why Mary was hated and the Church of England wasn't see Elizabethan Settlement. That said, the article still needs a great deal of work for GA. -- SECisek (talk) 08:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thanks, that's an improvement. Would it be a further improvement (less Churchillian!) to rephrase it as:
- According to Winston Churchill, many common people who had been indifferent to Protestantism in the past turned away from the Roman Catholic Church in light of the actions of Pole and Mary.[9] Writings such as John Foxe's 1568 Book of Martyrs, which emphasized the sufferings of Protestants under Mary, helped shape popular opinion against Catholicism in England for generations.[9] Roman Catholicism would remain outlawed in the UK until the 19th century.[10]
- Thanks, that's an improvement. Would it be a further improvement (less Churchillian!) to rephrase it as:
-
- Though I'd still like to know what Pole's actions were that led to the burnings - did he light the pyre, or preach against heretics or what? Be good if this could be filled out.
-
- Btw, this article is not the place to discuss it, of course, but presumably Catholics, Dissenters, Puritans, Covenanters, etc did hate the Church of England - they just didn't get to create "the scholarship" - with all those nice laws preventing them from studying or gaining positions. Even so, I'm surprised anybody still repeats "Catholics were hated because of fear of treason" stuff. Come the 17th century, Britain happily allied with Catholic France and Spain to attempt to curtail the power of the Protestant States of Holland in the Anglo-Dutch Wars - then promptly invited one of the Dutch leaders to help overthrow the English King! Anti-Catholicism seems more like an occasional convenience for rousing the mob. JackyR | Talk 01:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Rewording added. It was quite Churchillian, which I must confess to enjoying a great deal. Still, it was a little over the top.
As for what Pole did - again - the article needs much work from top to bottom. There is no mention of his squabble with the pope at the end of his life. These details are vital in painting the whole sorry picture that was his time as archbishop of Canterbury. I had intended to work this article to GA last summer after I finished my work on Thomas Cranmer, but never got around to it. If Pole interests you, I also did much work on William Cardinal Allen, Pole's contemporary, who was some what more successful at discharching the Counter-Reformation in England then Pole was. -- SECisek (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- OK, I've now also found refs in Simon Schama's History of Britain - it's not a specialist title but Schama is at least a historians' historian, rather than a Tory politician... I've also tried to make it slightly less incomprehensible for readers without knowledge of the Reformation. I'd be most grateful if you could cast an eye over this for howlers. I'm afraid Pole was only an accidental interest for me (how did I end up here?): I just removed the part that was clearly not WP:NPOV in tone. I don't have info on him other than in the Schama. Anyway, good luck with taking it up to GA. Best, JackyR | Talk 20:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I pulled out my copy of Schama and mad a slight tweek to the language. I really would like to edit this to GA. Pole was such an interesting individual. -- SECisek (talk) 01:57, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
