1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
mihalych1998 [28]
2 years ago
9

what steps did the puritans take to solve the problem of the unsaved church members were they successful? why or why not?

History
1 answer:
olya-2409 [2.1K]2 years ago
3 0

Answer:

Which religious group wanted to purify the Church of England?

Puritans tried to purify the established Church of England

The English Reformation took shape in 1529 after the pope refused King Henry VIII's request for a divorce. The king's anger at the pope led him to split with the Roman Catholic Church and establish the Church of England, or the Anglican Church.

Explanation:

You might be interested in
How did an artisian make a living?
jolli1 [7]

Answer:

D. by producing works of art

7 0
3 years ago
Why were the twelve tables created
Rina8888 [55]
It was made so there could be a solid set of laws to keep to protect plebeians from the unfair treatment of the partricians. 
8 0
3 years ago
why is it in the presidents best interest to nominate several federal judges favored be most senators?
slamgirl [31]
During the summer of 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia established equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House of Representatives.  Called the “Great Compromise” or the “Connecticut Compromise,” the unique plan for congressional representation resolved the most controversial aspect of the drafting of the Constitution.  

In the weeks before the Constitution’s framers agreed to the compromise, the delegates from the states with large populations argued that each state’s representation in the Senate should correspond to the size of the state.  Large-state delegates promoted James Madison’s Virginia Plan, the document that was the basis for several of the clauses in the Constitution.  Under this plan, the Senate and the House would base their membership on the same proportional “right of suffrage.”   That is, the number of senators in each state would be determined by its population of free citizens and slaves.  Large states, then, stood to gain the most seats in the Senate.  As justification for this advantage, delegates noted that their states contributed more of the nation’s  financial and defensive resources than small states, and therefore, required a greater say in government.

Small-state delegates hoped to protect states’ rights within a confederate system of government. Fearing the effects of majority rule, they demanded equal representation in Congress, as was practiced under the Articles of Confederation and assumed in William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan.  In fact, some framers threatened to withdraw from the convention if a proportional representation measure passed.  

Other delegates sought a compromise between large-state and small-state interests.  As early as 1776, Connecticut’s Roger Sherman had suggested that Congress represent the people as well as the states.  During the 1787 convention, Sherman proposed that House representation be based on the population, while in the Senate, the states would be equally represented.  Benjamin Franklin agreed that each state should have an equal vote in the Senate except in matters concerning money.  The convention’s grand committee reported his motion, with some modifications, to the delegates early in July.  Madison led the debates against Franklin’s measure, believing it an injustice to the majority of Americans, while some small-state delegates were reluctant even to support proportional representation in the House.  On July 16, delegates narrowly adopted the mixed representation plan giving states equal votes in the Senate within a federal system of government.

Once delegates established equal representation in the Senate, they needed to determine how many senators would represent each state.  State constitutions offered some guidance.  Several states designated one senator per county or district, while in Delaware there were three senators for each of the three counties.  Convention delegates did not refer to the state precedents in debate, however.  Instead, they seemed to take a common-sense approach in deciding the number of senators.

According to constitutional commentator Joseph Story (1779-1845), few, if any, delegates considered one senator per state sufficient representation.   Lone senators might leave their state unrepresented in times of illness or absence, and would have no colleague to consult with on state issues.  Additional senators, moreover, would increase the size of the Senate, making it a more knowledgeable body, and better able to counter the influence of the House.   On the other hand, a very large Senate would soon lose its distinctive membership and purpose, and actually decrease its ability to check the lower house or to allow senators to take personal responsibility for their actions.

Given these considerations, delegates had a limited choice regarding the number of senators.  During the convention, they briefly discussed the advantages of two seats versus three.   Gouverneur Morris stated that three senators per state were necessary to form an acceptable quorum, while other delegates thought a third senator would be too costly.  On July 23, delegates filled in the blank in the proposal offered by Morris and Rufus King: “That the representation in the second branch consist of _____ members from each State, who shall vote per capita.” Only Pennsylvania  voted in favor of three senators.  When the question turned to two, Maryland alone voted against the measure, not because of the number, but because Martin disagreed with per capita voting, which gave each senator, rather than each state, one vote.

6 0
3 years ago
When kign john signed the megna carta in 1215 he began the idea that governement can only do what the people allow it to accompl
trasher [3.6K]

Answer:

Popular Sovereignity or Consent of the Governed.

Explanation:

The Magna Carta which was singed by King John of England on June 15, 1215 is a historical and landmark document that established modern democratic values. Through this document, the idea 'government can only do what the people allow it to accomplish' developed and shaped how governments function and use thier powers in a democratic state.

This concept is also called as 'popular sovereignity or consent of the people'. Its basic principle states that the power and authority of a state/government can only be created and exercised if the people consent to it. Without the people's consent, the government cannot exercise any sovereignity or authority in any way.

3 0
3 years ago
William the Conqueror took control of England in the year 1066. This was in which century? A. ninth B. tenth C. eleventh
Mamont248 [21]
C. 1066 is in the eleventh century.
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • How did freed slaves react to their new status after the civil war?
    8·1 answer
  • How did protective tariffs benefit American manufacturers in the early-1800s?
    15·2 answers
  • Not including south africa, what was the name of the last african nation to achieve independence?
    11·1 answer
  • Which of the following emerged in Western Europe in large part as a reaction to the diplomatic exchanges exemplified in the pass
    7·1 answer
  • The United States gained control of Texas after armed conflict with the forces of
    12·1 answer
  • The French middle class and peasantry belonged to the ?
    9·1 answer
  • Which colony adopted a plan to gradually free enslaved people
    13·1 answer
  • Người đã biên soạn bộ sách bách khoa song ngữ về aztec là ai
    7·1 answer
  • How does a referendum give people more influence in government?
    15·1 answer
  • Civil law has to do with
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!