Does this man ever have an unpublished thought?

It is problematic to try to extrapolate Shakespeare’s views from his characters, as he often has murderers mouthing virtuous platitudes (e.g. ‘talkers are no good doers’) and the virtuous mothing self-contradictions. Lines from a play really apply to the character and not the author. People interested in this subject should read “As They Liked It: A Study of Shakespeare’s Moral Artistry” by Alfred Harbage.

#1, probably not, but it would be good if he did.

#1 and #3,

To be fair to Rowan Williams, much of what appears under his name is there because the internet makes redistribution of it so easy. I suspect that his statements appear in the popular press in much the same proportion as those of Davidson, Temple and Ramsey. 

If you go back to the nineteenth century, there were frequent “vanity” reprints of public addresses and sermons whose enduring relevance - except to scholars interested in the author - is debatable.   

Catholic and Reformed

Back to the main topic:  Shakespeare’s Catholicism has been well argued in scholarly books such as Shadow Play by Claire Asquith and The Catholicism of Shakespeare’s Plays by Peter Milward.  Shakespeare’s father was fined for recusancy and there are clues scattered here and there that indicate his own faith.  The thesis is usually opposed by those of the ‘Protestant Island’ tendency who like to see Shakespeare as the bard of a doughty Tudor English Protestantism.

To be honest, in high school I hated Shakespeare. I only read some of his plays under duress (as in read or Fail). That archaic language was a terrible drag.
  But as an adult I began to realize some of the depth and beauty and creativity of so many of his works.
  And then some modern movies were made by Kenneth Branaugh and Mel Gibson that I thought were fantastic.
  But one thing bothered me.
    Long before it became almost a fad in some circles to consider Shakespeare a secret Catholic, my wife and I were baffled by what seemed so much Catholic imagery and lines in some of his plays. I’ve long since forgotten which lines or scenes seemed so strange from a writer who has been considered the bard of Protestant Elizabethan England.
  But for once, I find myself agreeing with Archbishop Williams.

Much of what people find ‘catholic’ in Shakespeare, on closer examination turns out to be concepts common to classical protestants as well as roman catholics. 

But no matter. Everyone has their theories about ol’ Will.

One thing in favour of the thesis: if he had been catholic and if Elizabeth I had known, it wouldn’t have bothered her: she “made no windows into men’s souls”!

I note reading the article, that ABC’s words are reported as:

“I don’t think it tells us a great deal, to settle whether he was a Catholic or a Protestant, but for what it’s worth I think he probably had a Catholic background and a lot of Catholic friends and associates.”

Perhaps a little less controversial than the headline!

From the letters in today’s (London) Daily Telegraph: 
Archdeacon Davies, chaplain of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, wrote that Shakespeare “died a papist”. ... this document [is] among the Fulman manuscripts in the college library. Davies, an unimpeachable source, was also rector of Sapperton, Gloucestershire, in 1695 and Archdeacon of Coventry in 1703.

Dead wrong. Shakespeare’s plays were written by Conan Doyle. Everyone knows this. Shakespeare himself was Elizabeth 1 in disguise.
RW had better read history more carefullly.  L