Some evidence suggests that religious reasons are most important for causing the war like the Scottish rebellion and growing gap between Puritans and standard Protestants. However, some evidence suggests Charles style of reign was most important. Like his very strong belief on divine right of kings. There is also evidence for financial problems being an issue, social, constitutional and national conflict. There is no clear answer really.
There are a number of religious reasons as to why the civil war broke out. One of the reasons not necessarily the most crucial was that Charles married a Catholic woman; this caused a number of fears that she would convert him. Although a protestant he was a cultured man and enjoyed decorated churches, this however was seen as Catholic and angered many Protestants especially Puritans. However, what angered most Protestants out of all the religious squabbles was Archbishop William Laud. He was a huge opposition of Puritans a sect of Protestantism. He was afraid of the local bishops running there own church and the system of hierarchy that he was head of being overrun. However, the Protestants thought the Counter Reformation which at the time was spreading all through Europe would come to England. Also the fact the Protestants were losing the 30 years war.
Other reasons for the civil war was financial problems this was mainly based around the fact Parliament had to give him permission to collect taxes which meant as the parliament didn't like his view on the divine right of kings they suppressed money from him. To get money from the people Ship Tax was introduced another tax first introduced in just coastal counties
In the 1970s, a Marxist approach to the reasoning behind the civil war was favoured as after all Parliament is commoners and the crown is aristocracy. However, in the end it was discovered, after doing a survey, that the two sides were split evenly so technically the whole Marxist approach is not valid. Therefore a lot of time was wasted in Cambridge and other universities in the 1970s trying to prove the Marxist approach was incorrect.
Porco dio
There are only 2 Houses of Parliament: Lords and Commons. The 3 Houses joke on Arrested Development was just that. The Crown is NOT considered part of Parliament. Do not confuse Crown-in-Parliament-Under-God as a constitutional doctrine for the Crown as a House.
45
Parliament first limited the power of the Crown under the Petition of Right, 1628.
The United Kingdom (which includes England) is both a Parliamentary Democracy and a Constitutional Monarchy. All laws have to be debated and passed by the elected Members of Parliament. They also have to be given the Royal Assent (signed) by the reigning Monarch although this is just a formality as the Monarchy (Crown) isn't allowed to be involved in political decisions.
The Crown is a symbol of Government, including Parliament, legislatures, courts, police services and the armed forces
The Crown is a symbol of Government, including Parliament, legislatures, courts, police services and the armed forces
He could. There might have to be an Act of Parliament.
In A Crown of Wild Olive by Rosemary Sutcliff, the external conflict is between the protagonist Marcus and the invading Roman forces threatening his home, while the internal conflict revolves around Marcus's struggle to reconcile his loyalty to Rome with his love for his homeland and people.
"http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Under_what_document_did_Parliament_first_limit_the_crown"
The Declaratory Act
by two kings named the White Crown and the Red Crown