Quote:
Originally Posted by Victoria
You make a great point in terms of the power of the church. And yes, it absolutely forbid divorce. But the church and state had separate mandates and distinct authorities. The Titulus Regius was within Parliament’s domain. The consent of the church wasn’t necessary for the legislation, as it would be for a divorce.
I think it’s shaky to build a case for Richard on the basis of an unimpeachable church. If the church was so independent and wouldn’t just go along with Richard’s demands, why did it remain silent and look the other way for decades while Edward IV was bigamous? Bigamy should have been as morally offensive as divorce to trustworthy Bishops.
If instead, the church was morally offended by Edward’s bigamy, but silent because of their fear of reprisal, then it’s reasonable to assume they went along with Richard’s demand out of fear as well.
Where was the justice and due process? No evidence was given. And since both parties were dead, they were denied an opportunity to refute the allegation. Parliament seemed to work quite differently than a court.
|
Titulus Regius was created by “the Lords Spiritual and Temporal” and then ratified by Parliament. The church was very involved in the whole matter.