ves to be champions of freedom of conscience.
On a more secular and political level, the English associated Catholicism with the absolutism of Louis XIV of France. Although in reality the Papacy and the French monarchy were no allies, in the English public mind they were two arms of one great conspiracy, the victory of which would lead to all the horrors associated in popular tradition with Bloody Mary and the Spanish Inquisition. Similar horrors were (in the Protestant view) on display in contemporary France, where Louis XIV had revoked of the Edict of Nantes, which had given Protestants freedom of worship for nearly a century. The dragonnades; Huegenots sent to the galleys; thousands of others driven into exile; all formed the English image of what would be in store for them under absolutist Catholic rule. Diarist John Evelyn would write starkly, in early 1686, of "Unheard-of cruelties to the persecuted Protestants of France, such as hardly any age has seen the like, even among the Pagans.
James II was said to have voiced approval of Louis XIV's action, though there is evidence that in fact he did not. At home, he was organizing a standing army, itself contrary to long-standing English tradition; moreover, it was an army answerable only to himself, and commanded by a large proportion of Catholic officers. All of these factors thus brought political and religious anxieties together, and eventually drove James from the throne.
It is open to question, however, whether James's Catholicism and his inclination toward absolutism, even in combination, would have been enough to bring about a revolution. A comparison may be made to his brother and predecessor, Charles II (reigned 1660-1685). Charles was a nominal Anglican, long suspected of Catholic leanings, who indeed had himself received into the Catholic Church on his deathbed. He was also by inclination an absolutist, who sought good relations with Louis XIV...