Kendell E. Gulya 2004
The individual that attempts a critical analysis of any work by William Shakespeare is forced to perform that analysis through a variety of literary lenses or perspectives. Shakespeare’s plays are, at the deepest level, attached to the society in which he lived and reflective of the population’s values, beliefs, and behaviors. Measure for Measure, a problem comedy written at the beginning of the 17th century, is no different. Shakespeare writes this drama as James I, the former King of Scotland, assumes the English throne after the death of the revered Queen Elizabeth. English society is suddenly confronted with questions regarding the new monarch’s ability to sustain a country that has endured the battle of a religious reformation from the Catholic Christianity of the Roman papacy to that of the Anglican Church. Therefore, the study of Measure for Measure requires a disciplined dedication to the history of Shakespeare’s world, paying careful attention to the possible social, political, economical, psychological, and religious movements that may have ultimately affected the playwright’s audience and therefore also the messages contained within his writing. A number of critics have suggested that Measure for Measure, probably written in 1604, contains an impressive body of evidence revealing a distinct relationship between the message of the play and the Catholic symbolism that appears throughout the text. The character of Duke Vincentio is an extremely interesting example of the tension that often exists between common and religious authority during this particular period. The fact that the Duke provides the resolution at the conclusion of the play, both as a Catholic friar and a secular political figure, may suggest that Shakespeare has directed a message of tolerance and compromise at a new monarch who has not yet established his own principles. By examining the history of Catholicism in an Anglican England, the accession of James I, the duality of the Duke, the Catholic symbolism within the play, and the significance of the title, one is able to conclude that Shakespeare intentionally created friction between the secular and the spiritual spheres in an effort to comment on the contemporary conditions of English society.
By 1603, the year in which Queen Elizabeth died and James I assumed control, England had experienced great dissonance as a result of Henry VIII’s decision to remove England from the realm of the Roman Catholic Church. Henry VIII introduced the Anglican Church and pronounced himself head of the institution. He declared England a Protestant state and killed those continuing to practice Catholicism. After Henry’s death and his only son’s brief reign, his daughter Mary assumed the throne and again changed the national religion of England back to Catholicism. She proceeded to kill large numbers of England’s Protestant population. Finally, Elizabeth assumed the throne, returning to the Anglicanism of her father and maintained the community of the nation by closing her eyes to the private practice of Catholicism. Still, Elizabeth introduced a number of laws that outwardly punished those who did not participate in the Anglican faith. Recusants, or individuals who refused to attend Anglican services, were forced to pay large fines or forfeit portions of their property (Haugaard, 291-309). Though "the laws were rarely enforced severely, and were regarded by the Government as a restraining instrument upon Catholic aggression, the ever present threat of enforcement had reduced Catholics to a miserable and desperate group" (Jordan, 58). During the first years of James I’s reign, the monarch was forced to deal with a number of Catholic petitions requesting even further toleration for the ostracized religion. James I was initially cooperative, but as the majority of the population grew enraged by his actions, he abandoned his prior clemency and articulated a decision continuing the forbiddance of the public practice of Catholicism. Dr. W. K. Jordan, a professor of history at Harvard University, quotes James I as saying, " there are laws and they must be observed, and there is no doubt that the object of these laws is to extinguish the Catholic religion in this kingdom; for we hold it undesirable… to allow the increase of persons who profess obedience to the will of a foreign sovereign as the Catholics do" (Jordan, 68).
Such a statement, made by the most prominent figure of authority in contemporary English times, becomes overwhelmingly instructive when examining the duality of the Duke’s character in Measure for Measure. It also comments on the tension between the extreme positions of the entirely secular character of Angelo and the devout and spiritual one of Isabella. Shakespeare reveals his Catholically informed intentions early by reintroducing the Duke as a friar, a religious person always identified through association with the Catholic faith. In Act Three, Scene One, Shakespeare includes the following lines from the Duke: "I am a brother/ Of gracious order, late come from the See/ In special business from his Holiness," which suggests that the Duke has returned as a messenger from the highest official of the Catholic church, the Pope (Measure for Measure, 3.2.444-446). By remaining in this disguise at the conclusion of the play, Shakespeare perhaps suggests that the Catholic papacy has directly influenced the ultimate judgments made by the Duke. The Duke’s decision to leave the city as a secular authority and return as a religious figure who eventually unmasks and returns to again to a secular identity is symbolic of an individual’s (perhaps King James’s) attempt to reveal religious authority through the cloak of political power.
In addition to the tension within the Duke’s roles, the play contains a number of references to the religion. The most obvious example appears in Act Two, Scene Three as the Duke, now disguised a friar, performs the act of penance for Juliet. David N. Beauregard suggests that the condition of penance had changed from the Catholic "form, in which it was a sacrament composed of three …movements: contrition, confession, and satisfaction," to the Anglican form in which confession became a private conversation with God, instead of one with a religious figure of authority (Beauregard, 35). The conversation between the two characters clearly shows penance in a Catholic form:
DUKE Then was your sin a heavier kind than his.
JULIET I do confess it and repent it, father.
DUKE Tis meet so, daughter. But lest you do repent
And that the sin hath brought you to this shame --
Which sorrow is always toward ourselves, not heaven,
Showing we would not spare heaven as we love it
But as we stand in fear --
JULIET I do repent me as it is an evil,
And take the shame with joy.
DUKE There rest.
Your partner, as I hear, must die tomorrow,
And I am going with instruction to him.
Grace go with you. Benediciti! (2.4.30-41)
"Juliet makes an auricular confession to the Duke as Friar; complete with the suggestion of final absolution when the Duke bids her ‘Grace go with you. Benediciti!’" (Beauregard, 43).
Marriage also plays an important role in the play in that it becomes the subject of much of the controversy. "Measure for Measure struggles with the question of jurisdiction, staging on-going early modern tensions between canon and civil authorities over the regulation of the desacralized matrimony within a Protestant state” (Chamberlain, 115). The fact that the Duke, a civil authority, provides a resolution that represents a Catholic interpretation of marriage customs in the 16th and 17th centuries provides further evidence that Shakespeare intentionally juxtaposes Catholicism and the monarchy.
Further proof for this statement of intention exists in the play’s title, which distinctly references St. Stephen’s day, a Catholic festival that stresses virtues such as patience and forgiveness. "Shakespeare took the title of his play from Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount: ‘Judge not that ye be judged. For with that judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged, and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again’" (Eisiman Maus, 2021).
Finally, it has been suggested that Shakespeare may have been Catholic himself, or held Catholic sympathies, since there is evidence that his father and daughter were fined recusancy fees for not attending the Anglican Church service. However, it is difficult to validate these sources and somewhat unimportant since Shakespeare’s own religious identity may not be relevant to the play (Raffel).
Regardless of Shakespeare’s religion, the play Measure for Measure provides its audience with an example of the struggle between secular and spiritual authority during a time of political uncertainty in England. There is no doubt that the evidence provided sustains the argument that Shakespeare’s play was likely a cryptic message to the new king; one that suggested tolerance for religion and the making of a conscious effort to avoid extremes.
Works Cited
Beauregard, David N. "Shakespeare Against the Homilies: The Theology of Penance in
the Comedies.” Ben Johnson Journal: Literary Contexts in the Age of Elizabeth, James
and Charles 7 2000: 27-53.
Chamberlain, Stephanie. "Defrocking Ecclesiastical Authority: Measure for Measure and
the Struggle for Matrimonial Reform in Early Modern England." Ben Johnson Journal:
Literary Contexts in the Age of Elizabeth, James and Charles 7 2000: 115-128.
Eisaman Maus, Katharine. "Measure for Measure." The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. Stephen
Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard, Katharine Eisaman Maus. New York,
London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1997. 2021-2027.
Ellis-Fermor, Una. The Jacobean Drama. London: Methuan, 1936.
Hassel, R. Chris Jr. Renaissance Drama and the English Church Year. Lincoln, Nebraska:
University of Nebraska Press, 1979.
Haugaard, William P. Elizabeth and the English Reformation. London: Cambridge
University Press, 1968.
Higham, Florence. Catholic and Reformed: A Study of the Anglican Church 1559-1662.
London: S.P.C.K., 1962.
Jordan, W. K. The Development of Religious Toleration in England: From the Accession
of James I to the Convention of the Long Parliament. Gloucester, Mass.: Peter Smith,
1965.
Raffel, Burton. Shakespeare and the Catholic Question." Religion and Literature 30.1
(1998 Spring): 35-51.
Shakespeare, William. "Measure for Measure." The Norton Shakespeare. Ed. Stephen
Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard, Katharine Eisaman Maus. New York,
London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1997. 2029-2086.
Stauffer, Donald A. Shakespeare’s World of Images: The Development of His Moral
Ideas. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1949.