Clerical Celibacy and Clerical Marriage in the Henrician Reformation: William Turner’s Protest in the Wake of the Six Articles
Clerical celibacy and clerical marriage were contested issues in the Henrician reformation. The juxtaposition of official proclamations and clerical protest helps shed light on the complexity of the issue. At an official level, the prohibition, punishment, and eventual outlawing of clerical marriage...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group
2024
|
| In: |
Reformation & Renaissance review
Year: 2024, Volume: 26, Issue: 2, Pages: 83–101 |
| Further subjects: | B
clerical celibacy
B Six Articles B Wittenberg articles B William Turner B Clerical marriage B Henry VIII |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Clerical celibacy and clerical marriage were contested issues in the Henrician reformation. The juxtaposition of official proclamations and clerical protest helps shed light on the complexity of the issue. At an official level, the prohibition, punishment, and eventual outlawing of clerical marriage was driven by Henry VIII’s religious programme. From 1509 to 1537, the King opposed clerical marriage and sought to suppress it. From 1537 onwards, Henry VIII and the English Parliament moved towards making it illegal, which the Act of the Six Articles (1539) accomplished. Popular reactions varied, one example being William Turner, who married in the aftermath of the Six Articles despite taking vows of chastity as a deacon. Turner’s protest against the Six Articles is an underappreciated case study of clerical responses to official proclamations, and his marriage and writings provide a fascinating test case for the reaction against the imposition of clerical celibacy in the Six Articles. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1743-1727 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Reformation & Renaissance review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/14622459.2024.2349152 |