# Has there ever been a Protestant dictator? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 16, 2013, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073 "2013-03-16T03:56:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/61 "2013-03-17T01:49:06Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > While I’m chewing on this, and before you experts get down: CoE is or isn’t Episcopalians? Because CoE clergy marry, don’t they? Or am I just thinking about Episcopaleans? > > I’ll butt out now. The Episcopal Church is essentiallly the same religion as the Church of England. However, the Church of England is (or at least was) a state church, and in the US the Episcopal Church was formed for Americans practicing that religion. The clergy in both churches may marry. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/62 "2013-03-17T02:51:41Z")
Ah, read the cite (amazing how helpful that can be :)). The Six Articles were suspended. I queried re marriage because of Article 3. OK, what’s the story with recusants, and underground Catholic services and all? I know that William Byrd, a Royal composer (and holder of the music publishing monopoly) kept his job, and everyone knew he was a Catholic. ---
**Author:** ![GythaOgg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/49beb7/32.png) [@GythaOgg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GythaOgg)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/63 "2013-03-17T03:00:58Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > There’s a distinction between the organization of the church and theology/doctrine. Henry was opposed to the authority of the Pope over the church in England, but he did not have fundamental disagreements over theology and doctrine, other than the area of papal authority. His views on this point seemed to have been similar to that of the Orthodox churches, which are united in doctrine but organizationally, do not have a single governor, Pope or patriach. (The Orthodox position is termed “autocephalic” - each church having its own autonomous head.) > > Even after he severed ties with Rome, the Church of England under his rule did not become a Lutheran church; it considered itself a reformed Catholic church. It wasn’t until his son Edward succeeded him that Anglicanism veered more towards Lutheran Protestantism. Elizabeth in turned pulled the Church back towards a “middle way.” > > The wiki article on the Anglican [Thirty-Nine Articles](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles#Ten_Articles_.281536.29) does a good job of tracing the evolution of Anglican doctrine under Henry, Edward VI and then Elizabeth. > > For instance, the [10 Articles of 1536](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles#Ten_Articles_.281536.29) had some elements of Lutheranism, but also clearly accepted many Catholic principles which Luther rejected: > > Articles 6, 7, 8, and 9, for instance, are much more Catholic than Protestant. > > Three years later, there was a conference between some C. of E. bishops and some German Lutherans. Not only did they fail to agree, but Henry dissolved the conference and the C. of E. issued the [Six Articles](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles#Six_Articles_.281539.29), which were even more close to Catholic doctrine than the Ten Articles had been: > > So, if you have a church that affirms the principles set out in the Six Articles, it’s difficult to say it’s a Protestant church. But, since that same church rejected the authority of the Bishop of Rome, it clearly wasn’t a Roman Catholic church either. > > **Poly, Kimmy** - your thoughts? Also of note - Henry very nearly had his last wife, Katherine Parr, executed for being Protestant. This also had something to do with court factionism about religion, but Henry considered her interest in the Protestant faith sufficient grounds to sign an order for her arrest, which he later repudiated. She found out about the order ahead of time and went directly to Henry and, basically, grovelled and swore to him that she wasn’t seriously interested in studying or debating religion except as a matter to entertain and distract him. This went over well and Henry rescinded the order. One of her circle, Anne Askew, DID end up tortured and burnt at the stake for being a heretic. ---
**Author:** ![TSBG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/77aa72/32.png) [@TSBG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TSBG)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/64 "2013-03-17T03:10:34Z")
Lincoln did suspend habeas corpus under dodgy circumstances–Congress is supposed to do it. But he was in the middle of a war, and crucially, Congress was not around–it was much less frequently in session in the 19th century. When Congress returned, Lincoln himself sought the retroactive blessing of the legislative branch. His actions in this matter compare favorably to those of other presidents who like to refer to the suspension of habeas corpus as though it justifies anything a president might wish to do. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/65 "2013-03-17T03:13:11Z")
What a fun tri-part thread! I wonder what the record is? (An ATMB query if there ever was.) ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/66 "2013-03-17T03:18:40Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Ok fine. > > Henry VIII was the first Protestant dictator. Nehemiah Scudder was the last. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/67 "2013-03-17T03:57:53Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > There’s a distinction between the organization of the church and theology/doctrine. Henry was opposed to the authority of the Pope over the church in England, but he did not have fundamental disagreements over theology and doctrine, other than the area of papal authority. His views on this point seemed to have been similar to that of the Orthodox churches, which are united in doctrine but organizationally, do not have a single governor, Pope or patriach. (The Orthodox position is termed “autocephalic” - each church having its own autonomous head.) > > Even after he severed ties with Rome, the Church of England under his rule did not become a Lutheran church; it considered itself a reformed Catholic church. It wasn’t until his son Edward succeeded him that Anglicanism veered more towards Lutheran Protestantism. Elizabeth in turned pulled the Church back towards a “middle way.” > > The wiki article on the Anglican [Thirty-Nine Articles](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles#Ten_Articles_.281536.29) does a good job of tracing the evolution of Anglican doctrine under Henry, Edward VI and then Elizabeth. > > For instance, the [10 Articles of 1536](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles#Ten_Articles_.281536.29) had some elements of Lutheranism, but also clearly accepted many Catholic principles which Luther rejected: > > Articles 6, 7, 8, and 9, for instance, are much more Catholic than Protestant. > > Three years later, there was a conference between some C. of E. bishops and some German Lutherans. Not only did they fail to agree, but Henry dissolved the conference and the C. of E. issued the [Six Articles](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty-Nine_Articles#Six_Articles_.281539.29), which were even more close to Catholic doctrine than the Ten Articles had been: > > So, if you have a church that affirms the principles set out in the Six Articles, it’s difficult to say it’s a Protestant church. But, since that same church rejected the authority of the Bishop of Rome, it clearly wasn’t a Roman Catholic church either. > > **Poly, Kimmy** - your thoughts? A prettysokid post. It needs to be remembered that we are talking about the Church under Henry VIII, not about the (Protestant-leaning) church under Edward VI’s two Lords Protector, the (submitted-to-the-Pope) Church of Mary I, or the _via media_ Church of Elizabeth I. It also needs to be noted that, except for a few Bishops loyal to the Pope and the dissolution of the monasteries, there was essentially no change in the internal organization of the English Church. Like this: Before the Act of Supremacy, priests answered to bishops, individual bishops to synods convened yb the archbishops, and bishops/synods/archbishops answered to the Pope. After the Act of Supremacy, _ **everything in that sentence stayed the same** _ except the fina word: [del]Pope[/del] \> **King**. Obviously priests and bishops who wouldn’t recognize the King’s authority over secular matters decided by canon law courts were replaced. And by and large the monasteries were either nearly empty, rich and occupied by venal and dissolute monks who ignored their vows of chastity and povert, or both. So while a few good apples were thrown out, Henry basically turned out a group which were tying down rich property without any spiritual benefit real or imagined accruing from it. To claim “Henry started a new Church” is to claim that the 2nd Continental Congress created Massachusetts – it had been subject to someone overseas and wasn’t any more, but was still the same place with the same institutions as before. Afew other points: Like Orthodoxy, Anglicanism is organized on more-or-less national lines, with independent churches in England, Wales, Scotland (the Scottish Episcopal Church), Ireland, Canada, the U.S. (the Episcopal Church), Australia, New Zealand, Uganda, South Africa, etc. Each church runs itself, but they are joined together in the Anglican Communion. And it is _almost_ true that all priests and bishops may marry – the exceptions are those in religious orders vowed to celibacy, like First Order Franciscans and the Order of the Holy Cross. They’re not celibate because of being priests, but because they’re monastics. A lot of Orthodox fall into this exception but very few Anglicans. ---
**Author:** ![Neidhart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Neidhart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neidhart)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 8:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/68 "2013-03-17T08:48:56Z")
Huey Long? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/69 "2013-03-17T13:06:56Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > While I’m chewing on this, and before you experts get down: CoE is or isn’t Episcopalians? Because CoE clergy marry, don’t they? Or am I just thinking about Episcopaleans? The evolution of the Anglican Communion parallels the evolution of the British Empire. As the Empire spread overseas, the Church onEngland came with it, and often had an preferential position in the colonies. For instance, wasn’t it an established church in the Colony of Virginia? However, as the overseas colonies revolted or evolved towards independence, the C. of E. similarly evolved into independent national churches. In the US after the Revolution it became the Episcopal Church. In Canada, with the evolution of the Empire into the Commonwealth, it became the Anglican Church of Canada, rather than the Church of England in Canada. The Archbishop of Canterbury is recognised as the leader of the Communion, but in _primus inter pares_ fashion: he has no authority over the various Anglican churches outside England. And the Queen only has authority within the C. of E. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/70 "2013-03-17T13:19:44Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > OK, what’s the story with recusants, and underground Catholic services and all? I know that William Byrd, a Royal composer (and holder of the music publishing monopoly) kept his job, and everyone knew he was a Catholic. Before Elizabeth came to the throne, there had been a lot of martyrdoms on both sides. Henry had executed Catholics and Lutherans who opposed his policies. During Edward’s time, Catholics had suffered oppression. Mary tried to return England to Catholicism, executing Protestants who opposed her. When Elizabeth came to the throne, she sought to end the oppression by establishing the Church in the middle way, with elements of both Protestantism and Catholicism. She stated that she didn’t want to inquire into men’s souls; that was a matter for them and God. So long as individuals accepted the authority of the Church as established, and her role in its governance, there wasn’t close inquiry into their personal beliefs. It was accepted that there were Catholics in England, but so long as they accepted the Queen’s authority and were discreet, there wasn’t persecution (at least, not by the standards of the day; Catholics were under civil disabilities which continued until the early 19th century, but there were no religious wars like the ones that tore Germany apart in the 17th century.) Think of it as a “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy with respect to Catholicism. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/71 "2013-03-17T13:26:22Z")
> [@TSBG](#): > > Lincoln did suspend habeas corpus under dodgy circumstances–Congress is supposed to do it. Cite, please - what provision of the Constitution, or Supreme Court decision, states that only Congress can suspend _habeas corpus_? ---
**Author:** ![obfusciatrist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/4af34b/32.png) [@obfusciatrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/obfusciatrist)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/72 "2013-03-17T14:30:23Z")
You can read the Chief Just of the Supreme Court at the time making his case for why the paower to suspend lies with Congress here, in the [Ex parte Merryman decision](http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=442) (a district court decision; a Supreme Court justices still did that kind of work back then). The Lincoln administration ignored the ruling and then eventually mooted it by releasing everybody involved. Later suspensions of habeas received at least ass-covering legislative support. It’s a pretty easy read, but the bullet points are: 1. The Constitutional text on the suspension of habeas is in Article 1, which defines the legislative branch and makes no mention of the executive. That article, after all, does begin with “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” 2. There is no mention of such power in Article 2 which defines the executive. Since it was explicitly defined for Congress, one would assume it would be explicitly defined for the President if that had been the intent. 3. Until Lincoln did it, all previous understanding was that it was a power that resided with the Legislature and not the president. - When Aaron Burr’s conspiracy was found out, rather than suspent habeas, Jefferson requested that Congress do it and in the debate that followed there was never any suggestion that Jefferson could have just done it himself. - Previous writings by Supreme Court justices (Joseph Storey and John Marshall are quoted) all stated that suspension was a legislative issue. Personally, I think it is pretty obvious that the power to suspend habeas is a legislative power based simply on the structure of the Constitution. But then I’m not a fan of “war lets the president do whatever he wants if he can argue it advances the war” and generally like limits on executive power. But for purposes of this thread I don’t think Lincoln, or any other U.S. president, qualifies. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/73 "2013-03-17T19:14:17Z")
> [@obfusciatrist](#): > > But for purposes of this thread I don’t think Lincoln, or any other U.S. president, qualifies. FDR’s internment of Japanese-Americans would possibly be a better example for discussion, although the fact that it was eventually overturned by the courts would presumably weaken the dictatorship aspect. ---
**Author:** ![moriah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b2d939/32.png) [@moriah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moriah)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/74 "2013-03-17T19:40:13Z")
Ya, know… Lincoln, FDR, George W… a little presidential overreach is _not_ the same as being a dictator. Anyone who confuses those two things needs to get their reality recalibrated. Apparently, “dictator!” is the new “nazi!” ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/75 "2013-03-17T20:04:05Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > “Oh, no! There’s madness in our method!” Shouldn’t that be: “Oh, no! There’s madness in our Method!” ---
**Author:** ![TonySinclair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/49beb7/32.png) [@TonySinclair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TonySinclair)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2013, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/76 "2013-03-17T23:30:16Z")
> [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > FDR’s internment of Japanese-Americans would possibly be a better example for discussion, although **the fact that it was eventually overturned by the courts** would presumably weaken the dictatorship aspect. The part I bolded will come as news to my in-laws. But the fact that it was upheld by the Supreme Court would presumably weaken the dictatorship aspect. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/77 "2013-03-18T04:09:50Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > The part I bolded will come as news to my in-laws. And most lawyers. As [wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korematsu_v._United_States) notes: > [@](#): > > The Korematsu decision has not been explicitly overturned, although in 2011 the Department of Justice filed official notice, conceding that it was in error, thus erasing the case’s value as precedent for interning citizens. However, the Court’s opinion remains significant both for being the first instance of the Supreme Court applying the strict scrutiny standard to racial discrimination by the government and for being one of only a handful of cases in which the Court held that the government met that standard. Now it is true that strict scrutiny is usually accompanied by a recitation that it is “strict in theory, and fatal in fact,” meaning that the outcome in _Korematsu_—permitting differential treatment on the basis of race—is now considered a virtually impossibility. But snappy aphorisms don’t have the precedential value of an opinion striking it down. And Justice’s “official notice” really only binds Obama’s DOJ. Lastly, some people do think that _Korematsu_ remains good law vis-a-vis wartime, “fate of the nation” circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/78 "2013-03-18T09:19:37Z")
> [@BrotherCadfael](#): > > Shouldn’t that be: “Oh, no! There’s madness in our Method!” :smack: ---
**Author:** ![11811](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/1/9d8465/32.png) [@11811](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/11811)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/79 "2013-03-18T18:33:24Z")
Efrain Rios Montt > **[Efraín Ríos Montt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efra%C3%ADn_R%C3%ADos_Montt)** > > José Efraín Ríos Montt (Spanish: \[efɾaˈin ˈrios ˈmont\]; 16 June 1926 – 1 April 2018) was a Guatemalan military officer and politician who served as de facto President of Guatemala in 1982–83. His brief tenure as chief executive was one of the bloodiest periods in the long-running Guatemalan Civil War. Ríos Montt's counter-insurgency strategies significantly weakened the Marxist guerrillas organized under the umbrella of the Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity (URNG), while also leading to ... and a US ally, no less! ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2013, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073/80 "2013-03-18T20:13:59Z")
> [@11811](#): > > Efrain Rios Montt > > [Efraín Ríos Montt - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efra%C3%ADn_R%C3%ADos_Montt) > > and a US ally, no less! See post #13. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-there-ever-been-a-protestant-dictator/653073.md?page=5)