Jesuits ...

[Picky_Picky]

I seem to recall some surprise being expressed on this forum a time back when someone mentioned that the (Anglican) University Church at Oxford has a plaque commemorating both Catholic (including Campion) and Protestant (including Latimer) martyrs of the Reformation.

It is dangerous to generalise about Anglicans, no doubt – I think some view them as motley – but perhaps there is a tendency in some Anglican circles to see the history of the Reformation as more complicated than simply Goodies v Baddies.

 

[jimkhong]

I seem to recall some surprise being expressed on this forum a time back when someone mentioned that the (Anglican) University Church at Oxford has a plaque commemorating both Catholic (including Campion) and Protestant (including Latimer) martyrs of the Reformation.

It is dangerous to generalise about Anglicans, no doubt – I think some view them as motley – but perhaps there is a tendency in some Anglican circles to see the history of the Reformation as more complicated than simply Goodies v Baddies.

I am OK about commemorating martyrs on both sides. Even if you don’t agree with what they died for, you can still respect their courage in dying for what they believed in.

My only reservations if canonising someone don’t agree with you. I think it is a disrespect to the person to insist he is to be incorporated into a church he did not agree with.

Nice to hear from you Picky.

Well, I agree the history of the Reformation is rather complicated. But here I am talking about something else here. I imagine that if Cranmer were to be told he is going to be made a saint by a Romish Pope while a separate CoE still exists, he will likely take it as an insult, especially if he is told that at the stake before being burnt.

 

[Picky_Picky]

I am OK about commemorating martyrs on both sides. Even if you don’t agree with what they died for, you can still respect their courage in dying for what they believed in.

My only reservations if canonising someone don’t agree with you. I think it is a disrespect to the person to insist he is to be incorporated into a church he did not agree with.

Nice to hear from you Picky.

Well, I agree the history of the Reformation is rather complicated. But here I am talking about something else here. I imagine that if Cranmer were to be told he is going to be made a saint by a Romish Pope while a separate CoE still exists, he will likely take it as an insult, especially if he is told that at the stake before being burnt.

Yep, OK, although the folk inserted in the CofE calendar by the CofE aren’t being canonised or incorporated into the CofE, they are people the CofE decided to commemorate on a particular day. The only person canonised by the CofE was Chas I, although few of us would see him as particularly saintly.

As an aside, I remember when the current Archbishop of Canterbury was enthroned it was the day for the commemoration of Cranmer. I’m sure the act of commemoration didn’t worry the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster who was there to read a lesson.

 

[jimkhong]

Yep, OK, although the folk inserted in the CofE calendar by the CofE aren’t being canonised or incorporated into the CofE, they are people the CofE decided to commemorate on a particular day. The only person canonised by the CofE was Chas I, although few of us would see him as particularly saintly.

As an aside, I remember when the current Archbishop of Canterbury was enthroned it was the day for the commemoration of Cranmer. I’m sure the act of commemoration didn’t worry the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster who was there to read a lesson.

So what then is the criteria and the process for both commemoration and the process for selection

 

[Picky_Picky]

So what then is the criteria and the process for both commemoration and the process for selection

I’m no expert on canon law, but I suspect a motion at General Synod, passed by all three houses, will get me included on the calendar. But, as I say, that wouldn’t make me St Picky, nice though that would be. Probably easier for me to become Sir Picky, in fact.

 

[Picky_Picky]

So what then is the criteria and the process for both commemoration and the process for selection

The form of the commemoration is normally a collect, I think.

 

[GKC]

Hmmm, interesting that he did though we all have to agree that the first Supreme Governor’s theology was rather Catholic.

Anyway, I always found it intriguing that the year of his death was also the founding of the Jesuits, coming back to the OP. Wonder if there was any cause and effect link.

Yes, in the main, Hank was a Catholic, but not a Roman one. He did try playing some footsie with the Lutherans, toward the end of his life, for political purposes and under the influence of his last wife.

And Hank was the Supreme Head, per the Supreme Head Act/1534.

 

[GKC]

I seem to recall some surprise being expressed on this forum a time back when someone mentioned that the (Anglican) University Church at Oxford has a plaque commemorating both Catholic (including Campion) and Protestant (including Latimer) martyrs of the Reformation.

It is dangerous to generalise about Anglicans, no doubt – I think some view them as motley – but perhaps there is a tendency in some Anglican circles to see the history of the Reformation as more complicated than simply Goodies v Baddies.

As you say. Motleydom encompasses the ability to see complexity in history. Messy place, history.

 

[GKC]

I am OK about commemorating martyrs on both sides. Even if you don’t agree with what they died for, you can still respect their courage in dying for what they believed in.

My only reservations if canonising someone don’t agree with you. I think it is a disrespect to the person to insist he is to be incorporated into a church he did not agree with.

Nice to hear from you Picky.

Well, I agree the history of the Reformation is rather complicated. But here I am talking about something else here. I imagine that if Cranmer were to be told he is going to be made a saint by a Romish Pope while a separate CoE still exists, he will likely take it as an insult, especially if he is told that at the stake before being burnt.

Even in the Roman fashion of canonization (not that there’s anything wrong with it), Saints are not so much made, as recognized and announced. And the Anglican actions do not incorporate anyone into the Anglican Church, but recognize them as of the Church Triumphant, One can assume either action to erroneous.

Picky Picky is my conduit to the CoE. Not that he’s in that arm of the Church Militant.

 

[GKC]

I’m no expert on canon law, but I suspect a motion at General Synod, passed by all three houses, will get me included on the calendar. But, as I say, that wouldn’t make me St Picky, nice though that would be. Probably easier for me to become Sir Picky, in fact.

Varies with the Anglican jurisdiction. Lambeth 58 has some words on it. A significant local cultus helps.

 

[GKC]

The form of the commemoration is normally a collect, I think.

I think so too.

 

[GKC]

Yep, OK, although the folk inserted in the CofE calendar by the CofE aren’t being canonised or incorporated into the CofE, they are people the CofE decided to commemorate on a particular day. The only person canonised by the CofE was Chas I, although few of us would see him as particularly saintly.

As an aside, I remember when the current Archbishop of Canterbury was enthroned it was the day for the commemoration of Cranmer. I’m sure the act of commemoration didn’t worry the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster who was there to read a lesson.

As to Charles, he is a sort of anomaly, as you know. His commeration service was removed from the BCP in 1859, and little notice of him is taken, outside the Society of King Charles the Martyr, who still recall him on 30 January. Mostly a bunch of Anglo-Catholics. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

 

[Picky_Picky]

(…)

Picky Picky is my conduit to the CoE. Not that he’s in that arm of the Church Militant.

Honoured. And not a member of that arm of the Church Militant except by nationality, as I like to amuse myself by saying.

 

[JanetF]

I rather like them since I am an alum and work for one of their Universities

 

[Peter_J]

I seem to recall some surprise being expressed on this forum a time back when someone mentioned that the (Anglican) University Church at Oxford has a plaque commemorating both Catholic (including Campion) and Protestant (including Latimer) martyrs of the Reformation.

It is dangerous to generalise about Anglicans, no doubt – I think some view them as motley – but perhaps there is a tendency in some Anglican circles to see the history of the Reformation as more complicated than simply Goodies v Baddies.

Yeah, I don’t think there’s any simple answer. With regard to Thomas More, it’s no surprise that many are surprised that Anglicans commemorate him, kind of like if RCs commemorated Jan Hus.

Still, no Catholic I know raises an eyebrow about commemorating Joan of Arc so … who’s to say I guess.

 

[Picky_Picky]

Yeah, I don’t think there’s any simple answer. With regard to Thomas More, it’s no surprise that many are surprised that Anglicans commemorate him, kind of like if RCs commemorated Jan Hus.

Still, no Catholic I know raises an eyebrow about commemorating Joan of Arc so … who’s to say I guess.

Although Pope Francis’s representative did attend the commemoration of Hus’s 600th a couple of years ago.

 

[Picky_Picky]

So what then is the criteria and the process for both commemoration and the process for selection

GKC knows (as ever). Guidance exists in Lambeth 58, resolutions 77 and following:

anglicancommunion.org/resources/document-library.aspx?author=Lambeth+Conference&year=1958&page=8

 

[Peter_J]

Although Pope Francis’s representative did attend the commemoration of Hus’s 600th a couple of years ago.

Oic. I know that the Polish National Catholic Church is big on Jan Hus, but they’re not Roman

 

[Padres1969]

I’m just curious what non-Catholics think about Jesuits, because when I was growing up Jesuits were often put down and jokes were frequently made at their expense. (All non-Catholics are welcome to answer but I’m thinking particularly of non-Catholics who are Protestant.)

Jesuits are some of the most knowledgeable men I’ve ever had the pleasure of knowing. Both in temporal and spiritual matters.

 

[jimkhong]

GKC knows (as ever). Guidance exists in Lambeth 58, resolutions 77 and following:

anglicancommunion.org/resources/document-library.aspx?author=Lambeth+Conference&year=1958&page=8

Thanks Picky but sorry. From a Catholic brought up on tomes of canons, injunctions, rubrics, rite books and 1000’s of Catechism questions: Is that all?

Doesn’t seem to answer the question though. It is just so general that anyone can be in the list. Maybe that comes from being in a broad church. Everyone is happy and has a reason for being in.

But leaving out my point of respect for the person, someone like Ignatius and Newman could not have been canonised in the Catholic Church. I mean if they are on the other side. This is because the assessor would have looked for not just the positive bits of the person but also the negative bits.

Catholics would also look at what the person could have written against the Church and anything the Church disagree with. Which is why Origen is not a saint and Newman’s process is taking so long. The risk is that we venerate a person wholly and it is going to be difficult to differentiate a person’s negative bits from the positive. People could end up as taking following the unintended part of the role model, which is what I presume an Anglican Communion saint is meant to be.

So, does this mean the Anglican Communion only look at good stuff and ignore the negative stuff? So, what happens if someone then say in following the example of Ignatius and More, declare Welby invalid as Archbishop of Canterbury?