Has the Catholic Church ever received compensation from the Church of England?

[Kaninchen]

I can’t help but feel that we’re deep into a CAF equivalent of vexatious litigant territory.

 

[Salibi]

I can’t help but feel that we’re deep into a CAF equivalent of vexatious litigant territory.

Deeply dug into an ancient grave is more like it.

In my country if someone brings up some controversial past thing about someone or something that has absolutely no relevance to the present one may say, by way of politely ending the conversation, “leave the dead in their graves.”

 

[Paul_Edwards]

The only groups who “lost” anything were the monasteries, who lost their land and the buildings on those lands. However, those monastic orders were all abolished and the monks and nuns all dead now. There is no one to compensate, unless you want to compensate the international orders

Either that, or give the money to the Holy See, who the orders looked up to and obviously would’ve wanted it to go there if nowhere else could be thought of.

 

[Paul_Edwards]

I happen to be one of those people, writing now from England, and I say that we should be able to have our churches back, especially churches like York Minster which still has the papal keys on it which I noticed when I visited. I pointed the keys out to the Oratorian brother who was next to me and he said “that’s because it’s ours really”.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Padres1969]

Is it though? I mean the RCC has had no part of maintaining or improving it for almost 500 years. And it was never stolen from its congregation. They became Anglican…

See that’s where this idea breaks down. Ok so you give it back to the RCC, but are they going to then compensate the Anglicans for 500 years of upkeep? And who is going to use it? You’d be stealing it back from the only congregation that’s ever used it to give it to ???.

 

[Paul_Edwards]

I mean the RCC has had no part of maintaining or improving it for almost 500 years

Only because it was impossible, And who’s fault was that? That is the fault of the British Government.

And it was never stolen from its congregation. They became Anglican…

Churches don’t belong to lay people. Not that it makes a difference, because they only became Anglican because they had no choice. and let’s not forget, the Martyrs did not become Anglican, and these buildings were more rightly there’s than anyone else’s.

to give it to ???.

Perhaps to give it to the people who honor those who were put to death for refusing to conform. To those people who commemorate the holy martyrs who one day was in those buildings and then the next day had their heads taken of or worse.

 

[Bithynian]

Catholic Church in England and Wales would probably resist any effort to have church buildings handed to them for the simple fact that they cost so much to maintain

Agreed. There are so many beautiful churches abandoned in the British Isles, largely because so little money is available to preserve them.

These heritage stained glass windows designed by one of Ireland’s most famous artists were found in an abandoned Catholic church:

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[Krisdun]

A sad scene that is sadly becoming more common in the UK and Ireland

 

[neophyte]

Also, there were mosques in Spain that were turned into Catholic Churches and was there ever compensation given for that?

Unless I’m mistaken, most of those were Catholic Churches before they were overrun and turned into mosques.

 

[Jbrady]

A sad scene that is sadly becoming more common in the UK and Ireland

During the last few weeks, I have been taking my family on looong rides through the Pennsylvania countryside. We frequently pass by abandoned or dilapidated old country churches, mostly Protestant, but a few Catholic ones, too. The weather-beaten ruined hulks often have an odd beauty about them, though it is sad to see them rot away.

 

[Jbrady]

Unless I’m mistaken, most of those were Catholic Churches before they were overrun and turned into mosques.

Not really. The invading Muslims were considerably wealthier and more technologically advanced than their Visigothic predecessors, and wouldn’t have had much use for their small, dark and cramped churches. There wasn’t much in the way of grand architecture in place that could be adapted to the invaders needs.

Even later Christians had little need for them, either, and much of the pre-invasion stock was torn down by Christians to build larger, grander churches.

It’s a shame, because in spite of being small, dark and cramped, the few survivors have a certain degree of intriguing charm to them, like they are from a completely different time and world.

 

[Krisdun]

To say Catholic Churches were ‘stolen’ by the CoE is perhaps a matter for debate but I highly doubt the Holy See gave the CoE permission to take over their churches as places of worship whilst simultaneously forbidding Catholics the right to attend RC masses in these churches. That is why there needs to be more dialogue between these two institutions today in order to determine how the RCC can in some way be helped to try and correct mistakes that were made in the past which badly damaged the RCC in the UK. Handing back churches to the RCC is probably not the answer in most cases but perhaps other things can be agreed? For example if a CoE church/property/land is sold should the RCC in England get a percentage of that sale?

 

[Jbrady]

I highly doubt the Holy See gave the CoE permission to take over their churches as places of worship

I highly doubt that the Holy See owned much property in medieval England. Ownership of church property was a lot more complicated at that time.

 

[Krisdun]

Don’t know how it was then but the CoE currently still owns a lot of land in England.

Holy lands | The Spectator

 

[LilyM]

Padres1969:

I mean the RCC has had no part of maintaining or improving it for almost 500 years

Only because it was impossible, And who’s fault was that? That is the fault of the British Government.

And it was never stolen from its congregation. They became Anglican…

Churches don’t belong to lay people. Not that it makes a difference, because they only became Anglican because they had no choice. and let’s not forget, the Martyrs did not become Anglican, and these buildings were more rightly there’s than anyone else’s.

to give it to ???.

Perhaps to give it to the people who honor those who were put to death for refusing to conform. To those people who commemorate the holy martyrs who one day was in those buildings and then the next day had their heads taken of or worse.

Of course they had a choice. Even two of your post-Reformation monarchs - Charles II and James II - became Catholic.

The alternatives placed before British Catholics may have been grim - many left the country and those who stayed were persecuted and discriminated against in many ways - but so they have been in many times and places.

Italians living in what used to be the Papal States aren’t demanding compensation for the fact that what used to all be Church property has changed hands there. Neither are Catholics in Germany or other European cpuntries which also went through the difficulties of the Reformation.

 

[Theo520]

Given the day, they likely had no choice of church before or after the COE
But the physical building they paid for was still there for them

 

[ltwin]

Either that, or give the money to the Holy See, who the orders looked up to and obviously would’ve wanted it to go there if nowhere else could be thought of.

The Holy See had the chance during the Marian Restoration. It prudently decided to let the matter drop because a Catholic England without loads of church wealth was better than a Protestant England. And, if Mary had lived or secured a Catholic succession, Catholic kings could have restored some of the lost wealth and monasteries in time. Queen Mary herself restored like 7 of them, but obviously, she died before she could do much more.

 

[ltwin]

Don’t know how it was then but the CoE currently still owns a lot of land in England.

That is different from saying the Pope owned land in England. The Pope owned little if any land in England. That land was held by various bishops, abbots, abbesses and parish priests and so on. Even in the Middle Ages, church property was never as simple as “the Pope is head of the Church; all church property belongs to the Pope.”

Church land was donated from the rich for specific purposes. Some of it was given to a monastery. Some of it was given to found a parish and support a priest. Some of it was given to diocesan bishops making them great lords and landowners in their own right. I doubt there are many if any examples of land being given to the Pope in England.

 

[Krisdun]

I suppose the question to ask is who actually owned the Catholic churches and monasteries in England before the reformation? Were they owned by the state? By wealthy private (non-clergy) landlords? By the Roman Catholic church? Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church? If land was held by bishops or parish priests then my understanding would be it belonged to the Catholic diocese.

 

[Paul_Edwards]

By the Roman Catholic church? Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church? If land was held by bishops or parish priests then my understanding would be it belonged to the Catholic diocese.

Exactly, not to the Anglican Diocese who should’ve left Catholics alone and bought or built their own buildings. People with allegiance to the Pope should’ve been allowed to continue in the original buildings like before and everyone else should’ve left.

Of course they had a choice. Even two of your post-Reformation monarchs - Charles II and James II - became Catholic.

Monarchs had a choice, but everyone else did not - they had to submit to whatever the monarch decided.