from: http://www.lmschairman.org
I have mentioned before Clare Asquith’s book Shadowplay and her argument about the coded messages in Shakespeare relating to religious matters. It can easily sound a bit Dan Brown-ish but actually a lot of it is common sense. If a playwright today wrote a play about a Prime Minister who involved his country in a distant war on the basis of false information, anyone who doubted that this gave the playwright an opportunity to pass some kind of comment on Tony Blair and the Iraq war would be regarded as very dull. When Shakespeare writes – as in A Winter’s Tale – about a king who seeks to rid himself of a virtuous wife, and is enraged when the world-centre of religious authority, to which he appeals, sides with her, and you connect this with events of Henry VIII’s reign, everyone thinks you are a conspiracy theorist.
The easy explanation for the double standards is simple enough. Shakespeare’s comment on those events, if that is what it is, is that things can only be put right by a painful repentance and a seemingly impossible restoration. That is not the attitude to Catholicism which modern literary critics want to attribute to Shakespeare.
But taking a common sense approach to interpretation, Shakespeare has an opportunity to make a little comment on the centre of religious authority, ‘Delphi’: that is, Rome. He doesn’t ham it up, it is just a tiny scene (Act III scene I) in which the ambassadors are returning and talking about their experiences. What did they find in Delphi, apart from the oracle itself? They found liturgy.
The ambassador Dion speaks.
I shall report,
For most it caught me, the celestial habits,
Methinks I so should term them, and the reverence
Of the grave wearers. O, the sacrifice!
How ceremonious, solemn and unearthly
It was i’ the offering!
He is talking, of course, about the Traditional Mass, and its power to communicate divine realities to the onlooker.
Photos: Pontifical High Mass, celebrated in Ratcliffe by Bishop Malcolm McMahon for the LMS Priest Training Conference, and in Westminster Cathedral by Bishop John Arnold, for the LMS Annual Requiem.
Catholicism Pure & Simple 
“That is not the attitude to Catholicism which modern literary critics want to attribute to Shakespeare.”
But then, Gertrude, we also have:
“To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.”
Which is surely the finest expression of godless, nihilistic, Atheism ever written anywhere, by anyone. Or so it seems to Toad.
So, you pays your money, at the box office, and takes your choice.
LikeLike
Toad
You are forgetting that those lines are attributed to a character whom Shakespeare is drawing as labouring under a defect of reason or pretending to labour under a defect of reason.
For Shakespeare, nihilism is the mark of madness, not of sound judgment.
LikeLike
Seeing as there are over 884,000 words spoken by 1221 characters in Shakespeare’s oeuvre, Toad’s agenda-driven selectivity in quoting these lines can be consigned to File 13.
LikeLike
Why is Toad’s ‘agenda-driven selectivity,’ any more egregious than Gertrude’s?
Hasn’t she got an agenda? If she doesn’t, then she should get one, pronto.
There are those whose ‘agenda’ is to suggest Shakespeare was a secret Catholic.
Fair enough.
I’m not suggesting Shakespeare was an nihilist Atheist, any more than I’m suggesting he was a Catholic.
LikeLike
The ambassador Dion speaks.
I shall report,
For most it caught me, the celestial habits,
Methinks I so should term them, and the reverence
Of the grave wearers. O, the sacrifice!
How ceremonious, solemn and unearthly
It was i’ the offering!
He is talking, of course, about the Traditional Mass, and its power to communicate divine realities to the onlooker.
Well. Let’s respond to that claim with a resounding maybe. We just don’t know. We don’t know his religious sympathies, or his political sympathies. All claims made have been conjecture pied on speculation. That much is certain.
Now… johnhenrycn…. surely it is obvious to you that Toad, by responding to agenda driven selectivity with more of the same was making exactly the same point I am? Nobody knows Shakespeare’s thoughts on the matter. He left no Confessions, no Apologia Pro Vita Sua, and so there is an end of the matter.
Whereof we cannot speak….
LikeLike
You are forgetting that those lines are attributed to a character whom Shakespeare is drawing as labouring under a defect of reason or pretending to labour under a defect of reason.
How so Raven?, at least with respect to pretence Who is Macbeth pretending to? Were you mixing him up with Hamlet?
LikeLike
Very simply Shakespeare lived in an Age when Church and attendance were all but compulsary! Obviously he knew the Mass. The point is whether he was a art of that small minority who had money, friends and influence to keep the Faith (as opposed to Anglicanism) alive! His plays were popular and presented to the Administration (which was Anglican) so any preclavity he had could end up with his demise!
His plays were topical as were Marlowes (sic Jew Of Malta and Merchant Of Venice).
The Tempest it is suggested alludes to Dr Dee for instance. He would have been well aware of the persecution of Papal Caholics (The Pilgrimage Of Grace etc.)
The point is he wrote for a contemporary audience and his plays persisted through the Anglican centuries so its a mistake I think to read to much into his works expect to say he appeals to a wide and universal audience outside of his own time and culture.
Just enjoy and savour but I do not think anything can be proven from his works other than a mismash of Old and New Anglicanism (which wasn’t considered Anglican at that time!)
LikeLike
I agree Roger, the best thing a Catholic or any Christian can do is recognise that Shakespeare left us with a collection of plays that are (often) so sublime that they direct our mind and hearts to God. But we just don’t know his personal view of the religious controversies of the time, and we never will. Plus, the Catholic Church has Dante, the greatest poet that ever lived, so maybe let the Anglicans have Shakespeare? 😉
LikeLike
You have me there, Jerry, MacBeth was not pretending!
LikeLike
I agree with those who say we will (probably) never know anything definite about Shakespeare’s beliefs. I do believe, however, that his home town, Stratford-on-Avon was a hotbed of the Recusancy, and there is some evidence (not fully corroborated) that his parents were Catholic, although they would, of necessity, have kept quiet about it.
LikeLike
It is well established that his parents were Catholic. All the records are indisputable. The intriguing question (still to be proven) concerns his missing years ina Catholic household in Lancashire
LikeLike
Roger says, “its a mistake I think to read to much into his works expect to say he appeals to a wide and universal audience outside of his own time and culture”
Where should I begin to respond to that statement? If you do not understand him within his own time and culture – not outside of it – you will never know how he drew upon the immense challenges of his time to produce a universal message. SWuch an idea misses the whole point of literary study. Shakespeare is not a disembodied genius who happens to be, by chance, born into 16th century turmoil and writing for Elizabethan England. That is the social, political and religious setting which – through his genius – gives us the best collection of political, religious and human drama in all of human culture.
Or had you not noticed the connection?
LikeLike
Quite right, Jerry. If you are trying to teach Romeo and Juliet to a typical Key Stage 3 English class, you will not get very far unless you can explain confession (shriving) and the Catholic ethos in general, together with the importance of spritual direction (Br Lawrence) and the way that young people have trust in the Catholic priest even while they have no confidence in their manipulating parents. An that is the easiest play to interpret, from Shakespeare’s Catholicism. The more complex Catholic theology runs through the later plays.
All this has been well explored over the past decade – with many exciting discoveries – and I am surprised the comments here are so thin on the subject.
LikeLike
“You are forgetting that those lines are attributed to a character whom Shakespeare is drawing as labouring under a defect of reason or pretending to labour under a defect of reason.”
Raven, as always, spot on!
LikeLike
Of course I am aware of Romeo and Juliet and the Friar Lawrence. I am also very aware in Merchant of Venice of Baptism! The point I would make was that this should surprise given the 16th century. There are many excellent explainations of Shakespeare plays in contemporary terms. He wrote for His Age an incidently used other existing sources for his plays and gave credence to the world of these plays sic King Lear! Timon Of Athens! Troilus And Cressida.
His work is timeless but he was writing for a commercial and contemporary audience.
Dante yes and also Chaucer of course!
LikeLike
Everybody seems to be ignoring the fact that Shakespeare’s plays were all written by Montaigne.
Otherwise, why would one be called, “All’s Well That Ends Well,” Eh?
An unmistakable reference to the Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacres, surely you must agree, Gertrude?
Bet you don’t teach Form 3B that, Rabit.
LikeLike
The literary critical and biographical research on this question has changed out of all recognition in the past decade. If some of you are unfamiliar with this, I do recommend catching up with it, as it is fascinating.
“Was Shakespeare Catholic?” is a question which went beyond pub arguments about nothing-in-particular a long time ago, and it is perhaps a waste of time rehearsing the discussion here without catching up with the recent research, some of it relying on the kind of paleography which the Internet has enabled in recent times, with connections between library collections becoming so much more sophisticated.
Start with Joseph Pearce if you are interested. Here is one lecture of many.
LikeLike