I have thought for a long time that Shakespeare was one of the secret people who translated the King James Bible. Since the Pope at the time only wanted the Bible in Latin, Shakespeare would not have been Catholic.
“Since the Pope at the time only wanted the Bible in Latin”
Actually, that is a myth.
There were English language Bibles by Catholic sources and approved by the Pope well before Shakespeare: A great example of this is the Wessex Gospels(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wessex_Gospels) . This complete translation of the Four Gospels into Old English dates to around 990, when England was a thoroughly Catholic country.
Note that the Douay-Rheims (New Testament in 1582, Old Testament in 1609) was an English translation at the same time as Shakespeare (1564-1616)
Note that Wycliffe, Tyndale and Hus were NOT condemned for translating the Bible as such, but for more general crimes of heresy — part of which was expressed in how their Bibles were translated. For example: Martin Luther’s famous addition: Romans 3:28 says, “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law,” (NKJV) but Luther translated it so that it would say “. . . by faith alone, apart from . . .” This sort of interpretive translation was what was frowned upon.
Also note two points:
1. Shakespeare wrote plays for the common people so used the common person’s language.
2. People were multi-lingual at the time and people for millenia have reserved certain “language” for the sacred - right from the Akkadians/Amorites retaining Sumerian, through to Hindus retaining Sanskrit, Jews speaking Aramaic retaining Hebrew etc. We see it even today where may hold to KJV only.