Final answer:
An absolute monarch from Spain or Russia would have likely disagreed with the bishop's point of view advocating for Parliament's independence or opposing a Catholic absolute monarchy. The historical struggle between secular and religious powers, England's Protestant orientation, and France's example of reducing the nobility's role in governance suggest that absolute monarchs would favor centralized power and control over Church and state matters.
Step-by-step explanation:
Who would most likely have disagreed with the bishop's point of view? Considering the historical context, an absolute monarch from Spain or Russia would most likely have disagreed with the bishop's point of view if it included advocacy for the independence of the Parliament from the monarchy (C) or opposed the institution of a Catholic absolute monarchy (D). Absolute monarchies, such as those in Spain and Russia, typically aligned with the idea of centralized power in the hands of the monarch and often intertwined with the Church to legitimize their rule.
England's Parliament opposed a Catholic taking the throne for several reasons. Historical events like the movement of the Papacy to Avignon and the investiture controversy showed a struggle between secular and religious powers over control and authority. Additionally, the memory of conflicts such as Henry VIII's rejection of the Catholic Church's authority paved the way for a predominantly Protestant England that was wary of Catholic influence, especially memories of religious conflict and fears of a Catholic monarchy undermining English Protestant reforms and Parliament's power.
Lastly, the context of Louis XIV's reign in France as a divine-right monarch who reduced the nobility's role in governance further informs us about the tensions between secular authority and the role of the clergy and the Church. His approach to centralized rule with no sharing of powers would be antithetical to those who favored an independent and strong Parliament.