because he was elector of hanover before he became george I.
the electors were the ones who chose the holy roman emperor, a position with no real power, by the 18th century.
(and the incredible chance of him becoming the king of england has always impressed me.
his grandmother was elizabeth, the daughter of james the first of england, but she had 13 children.
his mother, sophia was the youngest and a female, so last in the line of succession.
she died just before queen anne, so we nearly had a queen sophia.
sophia's siblings were not eligible for the throne of england for various reasons, some were catholic, so ineligible, two sisters became nuns.
sophia was a protestant, so was the only eligible successor)
the holy roman empire had nothing to do with the papacy.
throughout the middle ages the followers of the holy roman emperor (an elected post), were called ghibellines, and the followers of the papacy were called guelphs.
they were always fighting for supremacy, the secular against the religious authority.)
2006-10-03 04:23:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Henry VIII 1509-'47
Edward VI !547-'53
Jane grey 1553 (9 days as queen, executed by Mary in'54)
Mary I 1553-'58 restored Catholicism
Elizabeth I 1558-1603 Confirmed the Church of England, had Mary, Queen of Scots executed
James I 1603-'25 Son of Mary, Queen of Scots and 1st of the Stuarts
Charles I 1625-'49 Executed by Cromwell
Commonwealth 1649-'59
Charles II ( The Restoration)1659-'88
james II 1688-'89 Attempted to restore R.C. church
Act of Succession forbidding a Catholic from ascending the throne
1689-1702 William and Mary ruled jointly
Anne1702-'14 End of the Stuart line.
George I 1714-27- 1st of the Hanoverians-He gained the throne as a result of the act of Settlement
Hope this clarifies when & why and where etc.
2006-10-02 16:08:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
George I was a Protestant, the United Kingdom having expelled its last Catholic monarch, James II, back in 1688 and being determined not to have another. When he ascended the British throne, he did not abandon his various German titles, including that of Elector of Hanover. The Holy Roman Empire, under which he held this title, has been described as neither holy nor an empire and in Germany many of the territories within it became Protestant during the reformation. This was how this Protestant King could quite happily be a prince of the Holy Roman Empire without compromising his principles in any way.
2006-10-01 23:50:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Doethineb 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
A lot of people here don't seem to know that George I ascended the throne in 1714. However the Holy Roman Empire included much of modern Germany, which was and is a predominantly Protestant country. So I would venture that despite its name the HRE wasn't Catholic.
2006-10-01 22:01:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dunrobin 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the law that a Catholic is not allowed to rule England was passed in 1688, a good few centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. BTW, it was repealed to allow Charles to marry Camilla, one of the many concessions made for her.
2006-10-01 09:46:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The 'no Catholic' rule came about during the reign of Henry VIII who was, initially, a staunch Catholic. When the Holy See denied him the right to remarry while a previous wife still lived, he broke all ties with Rome and declared the official religion of the realm to be the Church of England, with himself at the head. The rites, rituals and procedures of the Church of England were almost identical with those of the Catholic religion, but did not pay allegiance to Rome.
George I was on the throne prior to Henry VIII, and most of the rulers prior to that time were Catholic.
2006-10-01 13:00:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by old lady 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
The no catholic rule wasn't made until 1688 when Henry VIII took the pope's authority away from the Church of England in order to have a divorce, this started Anglicanism. So now Anglicans divorce and eat cake. This rule was also repealed later.
2006-10-01 17:14:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by thalog482 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
If you are talking about the Prince of Luxenmburg then there is nothing between that ruling house and the ruling house of England. You are talking about politics and religion of two seperate nations
2006-10-01 14:56:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by jaspers mom 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
the rules have changed over the years. several times.
2006-10-01 09:49:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
england used to be catholic... it wasnt until king richard (i think it was him) wanted a divorce and the catholic church wouldnt grant it to him so he broke away and became annoyed with catholics, but if you look a royal is allowed to marry a catholic... and Queen Elizabeth even said that Prince William could marry a catholic american if he so desired..
2006-10-01 09:46:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋