Posted on 02/06/2013 4:11:39 AM PST by NYer
You thought there couldn’t be a law and religion angle to today’s news—fascinating for us history nerds—that archaeologists have discovered the mortal remains of Richard III beneath a parking lot in Leicester? Think again. Plans are underway to re-inter the bones in the city’s Anglican Cathedral. Not so fast, say some: the hunchback king wasn’t a Protestant, but a Catholic, and he requires a Catholic burial. In fact, as Shakespeare fans know, Richard died at Bosworth Field (“A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!”), defending his throne from Henry Tudor. Henry went on to reign as Henry VII; his son, Henry VIII, broke with Rome. As The Tablet’s blog argued this morning, “Had Richard prevailed at the Battle of Bosworth Field, there would have been no Henry VII, therefore no Henry VIII and no Reformation. England today might still be a Catholic country.” Think of it: no Reformation, no Established Church, no Archbishop Laud, no Puritans, no Great Migration — no Massachusetts! — and no Establishment Clause. Surely there’s a law review article in there somewhere.
Leicester Cathedral seems to know it’s facing a sensitive situation. A Catholic priest is keeping watch over Richard’s remains (as is an Anglican, I believe), and the cathedral is planning a “multifaith” burial ceremony. Personally, I’m not sure why English Catholics are so keen to claim Richard, anyway. They must be forgetting the nephews in the Tower.
It’s all Greek to me.
I know it sounds counter-intuitive but I think the limited gene pool during the War of the Roses produced some extremely bright people. Richard, himself, was a Latin scholar, bookish, highly knowledgable about music, an able administrator and a military powerhouse. His brother, King Edward IV was no dope either. Henry VI might have been a little slow, though...
Being Catholic: Sacred Things, Relics and the Incorruptibles
I think that makes sense, actually. Look at the Lees ... some of the most brilliant people of their time, even the ones who were moonbat crazy.
You don’t believe that souls go to heaven, Purgatory or Hell at the moment of death? The souls are very much alive even though the body has died.
Have some ouzo.
An interesting "What If" Alternate History scenario. However, I think there would have been Reformation in England sometime in the 17th Century. Somehow I don't see folks like Oliver Cromwell remaining good Catholics. Therefore there would have been Puritans but when they overthrew the King, there would have been NO Restoration as happened when Charles II was returned to the throne. Most likely England would have remained a Republic which makes for some other interesting scenarios such as would there have been an American Revolution against not the British Crown but a British Republic.
Um...So why are you even posting on the Free Republic, a CURRENT EVENTS website, if you agree with the Jehovas Witnesses?
You would have to ask NYer, who would know about Eastern Rite Catholic Christian stuff.
The incorruptibles are a Catholic thing. I’m not a Catholic. Wiki discusses it. Notice that they are corrupted. Just not as much as many.
And regarding claims of NO corruption: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
You don’t believe that souls go to heaven, Purgatory or Hell at the moment of death? The souls are very much alive even though the body has died.
It happened both times I was put out. I’m thinking something like that is what happens when one dies. It “feels” instantanious. But I’ll find out for sure after I die. :-)
The Lees of Ole Virginia? Yes, some moonbats in that family although I love Marsh Rob (or is it Bob?)
Um...So why are you even posting on the Free Republic, a CURRENT EVENTS website, if you agree with the Jehovas Witnesses?
I don’t agree with them on everything. This may shock you but I am even in agreement with Satan on something. We both know that Jesus is the Son of God.
Jehovas witnesses, like Mormons, teach a lot of Christian principles but then leave some out or add some. e.g. they deny the Deity of Christ. Since it is the foundation upon which Christianity rests, I could never attend one of their churches.
Meanwhile, the Baptist church I attend is anti-alcohol. I’m not. But I still go there because their beliefs about the core teachings of Christianity line up with mine. Many churches do. But my main reason for going is to worship God through fellowship with other Christians. This includes both learning from them and teaching them as well as helping and being helped.
I don’t need to go to a church building to worship Him in other ways. In fact, we partake of communion at home. There is no requirement that it be done in the church building.
Hoo boy! The Sarum use is pre-reformation and so unusual that if the Catholic church really made a show of it, it would be televised around the world to a huge audience.
It would also be a huge one-in-the-eye to the Anglican lefties.
You said it.
DIfferent Robert Herrick. This one was mayor of Leicester.The poet spent most of his life as a vicar in Devonshire.
Oops! Thanks for the correction.
As to English, well was it Oscar Wilde who said England and America were separated by a common language?
I get the impression that Robert E. believed he had to make up for the rest of them. The Revolutionary generation of Lees, even Richard Henry, coin-toss for greatest orator of his time, were way out on the Far Side.
Many Christians are unconsciously neo-platonists. The doctrine of the General resurrection is little emphasized.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.