“She was conventionally religious. some of the statements made while she was in her fits (where the sufferer’s body turned temporarily into a battlefield between good and evil, and she was expected to voice godly sentiments) demonstrate this.” (The Bewitchment of Anne Gunter, pg.5)

I found it very interesting when Sharpe had state Anne was “conventionally religious”. By this, I believe it had meant she was the simplest form of what one would consider themselves religious by doing the basics ie. prayer, attending of sermons, and reading of scriptures. Although she was religious, she had still gone through the elongated lie her family put her through as a tool of revenge for her father. There’s a heavy dismissal of a religious perspective on the situation because all in all it is a sin to lie in God’s name and give in to her father’s purpose and sin, pride. Her purpose in sustaining this facade was to upkeep her relationship with her family and put their wishes on top of what she might’ve truly thought was wrong or right. Her moral compass was surrounded around her family and they took advantage of that with examples such as her father taking her to pray in a church as a vow of secrecy between her and her family about the bewitchment. They’ve skewed religion to support a system of filial piety to keep Anne obedient to her father so is Anne truly conventionally religious? Or is she just a daughter in hope of winning the love of her family through loyalty?

“I have already joyned my selfe in marriage to an husband, namely the kingdome of England” (Carol Levin, The Heart and Stomach of a King, pg.41)

Elizabeth had not been the first to label herself as the Mother of England. Queen Mary had also labeled herself as so and King James I was also said to proclaim himself as the Father of England following in Elizabeth’s and Mary’s footsteps. It was a well maneuvered political tactic to gain the respect and loyalty from the people in enveloping the people with a more intimate approach. However, Queen Elizabeth had been a true representation to acquire this familiar title because she’d neither been wed or had any children. Her children were the subjects of England who she’s sworn to protect which enhanced her title amongst the people. No male monarch would ever truly adopt that title as Elizabeth had because they would be seen as too unmasculine for the throne and be tied to a more Catholic approach to the idea of marriage instead of Protestant because of the heavy ideal put on marriage between man and woman. Also, Mary had sworn into marriage out of her own wish to provide an heir to continue Catholic practice but Elizabeth had sworn to her people and consecration of her own power.

¨all these were young men aged 40 or less, with a smattering of education, and though receptive, they were not qualified, but rather required instruction in spiritual counseling.¨(pg.114) A new Prior chosen 1201

I though that the choosing of the new sub prior was very interesting because it resembled when abbot Samson was chosen because of his secular nature yet many of his competitors seemed to be more religiously involved and have more legitimacy for the title such as Robert the prior. However, none of the ones chosen to be nominated for the sub prior are said to be spiritually prepared for such a title showing that they value education and the personal characteristics one shows to lead. And even so, they give the sub prior the option to reuse sermons and memorize them rather than become properly counseled thoroughly which is very interesting in my eyes.