Tags

As an undergraduate and then a graduate, this was a view which greeted me most days as I went about my studies. On this day there would be flowers and other tributes laid here. Occasionally a tourist would ask me what it was about, and some of them seemed none the wiser (though at least they were better-informed) when I told them it marked the site of the burning of an Archbishop of Canterbury and two other bishops of the Church of England. On one occasion only did I get an answer which surprises me, less now than it did then: “They took the Faith seriously back then, not like now!” It has not ceased to shock me – no one who toils in the blogosphere could be shocked – but it saddens me, not because I am some milquetoast who wants us all to “lurve” one another, but because it brings to mind Byron’s comment in “Don Juan” about “Christians have burned each other, quite persuaded, that all the Apostles would have done as they did.” God is the only just judge, and anyone who thinks that burning someone to death is a sign of how seriously they take their faith should pause and ponder what Jesus might have meant when he said that “For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again”. [Matt. 7:2].
In addition to Bishops Ridley and Latimer, whose burning was on this day in 1555, the more famous Archbishop Cranmer was burned on the same spot six months later, which is why today, in the Church of England calendar is called the memorial of the “Reformations Martyrs”. There were, as any historian can tells you, plenty of Catholic martyrs too, although, perhaps tellingly, it took until 2008 for a small plaque to be erected on Holywell Street in memory of four Roman Catholics — Thomas Belson, Humphrey Prichard, and the priests Richard Yaxley, and George Nichols — who were hanged, drawn, and quartered there in 1589, and beatified as martyrs in 1987. When a memorial was dedicated in 2009 to 23 Catholic and Protestant “Martyrs of the Reformation” in the University Church of St Mary the Virgin, Oxford, there were complaints that this was not what those who had been martyred would have wanted. Perhaps those complaining would have preferred another public burning of a “heretic”, which might well have been what those who were martyred would have wanted?
Violence begat violence, and and whatever one’s view of the English Reformation, and it remains a hotly contested field of scholarship, it was marked by a level of cruelty which to most of us does no service to the name of Jesus or to our common faith, for make no mistake, divided as we are by ecclsiology and history, Anglican or “Roman” Catholic, we share one faith, even as we share a sorry history of intra-communal violence.
None of this is to denigrate the martyrs on both sides, they were men (and women) who paid the ultimate price to stand by their beliefs, but we do their memory no service by continuing to dig ditches and erect barbed-wire to defend positions which a century of ecumenical dialogue has shown need no such defences. As Churchill put it in another context: “Jaw Jaw is better than War War.”
On the 500th anniversary of the Reformation in 2017, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York spoke in the spirit of the fruits of ecumenical dialogue when they spoke firts of the “blessings” of the Reformation:
Amongst much else, these would include clear proclamation of the gospel of grace, the availability of the Bible to all in their own language, and the recognition of the calling of lay people to serve God in the world and in the Church
but also of the:
the lasting damage done five centuries ago to the unity of the Church, in defiance of the clear command of Jesus Christ to unity in love. Those turbulent years saw Christian people pitted against each other, such that many suffered persecution, and even death, at the hands of others claiming to know the same Lord.
Much has been done to try to overcome the resulting legacy of mistrust, and indeed it can seem at times as those the most intense warfare is the internecine sort, where Catholics can be vitriolic about their own Pope and about those Catholics who are vitriolic about him. Maybe we really do learn nothing from history?
The Reformers in the sixteenth century, like later reformers within the Catholic Church, wanted to draw us back to what is at the heart of our faith, and that is the love of God for us, manifested through His Son, Jesus Christ who died for us that we should have life eternal. It is easy, which is why it is done so often, to mock ecumenism as a search for the lowest common denominator, and it may, or may not, be significant that this tendency is often to be found among converts, but properly understood, it is a search for the highest common factor – that the love and sacrifice Jesus made for all who would receive Him, can be made manifest in this vale of tears where we see Him as through a glass darkly, but where the scars of sin run vivid red and orange in the flames which consumed the martyrs.
Dr Rowan Williams gave a significant sermon on Blessed John Houghton and the other Carthusian Martyrs (http://aoc2013.brix.fatbeehive.com/articles.php/843/archbishop-of-canterburys-sermon-to-commemorate-carthusian-martyrs) which is well worth the time it takes to read it. Among other things he said-
“If Henry VIII is saved (an open question perhaps) it will be at the prayers of John Houghton. If any persecutor is saved it is at the prayers of their victim. If *humanity* is saved, it is by the grace of the cross of Jesus Christ and all those martyrs who have followed in his path.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you for the link – I had not seen that sermon, and as you say, it is well worth studying.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Outstanding article; very much enjoyed it. I do confess that I had to chuckle just a bit – 500 years ago, America wasn’t even ‘America’ yet! What a long, storied history England has.
The good news is, the denominations no longer threaten each other. The bad news is, in many places around the world, Christians are still being martyred; not from ‘within’, but from outside the Church. As important as it is to remember to remember the great martyrs – and it very much is important – it’s important to remember that this is occurring with alarming regularity in this ‘enlightened’ age.
LikeLiked by 2 people
In reality no. But without these events, there is no America. For without Henry’s turning from the continent, there is no Golden Hind circling the globe, there is no Sir Walter Raleigh promoting the New World, and no Pilgrim Fathers, let alone the famous First Families of Virginia. We easily forget that the modern World as emplaced by first England and then America is in its roots a Tudor Enterprise.
And so as the passions cooled after the English civil war, the Anglican ability to see all sides took hold (yes, Catholics were discriminated against well into the 19th century) but rarely really persecuted, and there are the roots of American religious freedom, as well as American political freedom.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That is an excellent set of points Dave. Thank you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve had excellent teachers, you amongst them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you, Audre, and you are right to draw our attention in that direction.
LikeLiked by 2 people
This plaque is Howeld Department Store in Cardiff. Rawling White was an illiterate fisherman who died for his faith. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rawlins_White_memorial_plaque.jpg
LikeLiked by 3 people
Just to say how much I loved this! xxxx
LikeLiked by 2 people
Chalcedon – thanks for this.
I think the comment “They took the Faith seriously back then, not like now!” refers to willingness to be martyred – the people who made the comment were not advocating burning heretics at the stake!
I’ve encountered so much from people like Karl Barth and T.F. Torrance who see `the church’ as something that is supposed to have `a voice’ (and hence some interest in ecumenical dialogue), but it simply isn’t working.
Take, for example, the treatment of Julian Assange, who – from what I’ve heard – isn’t a very nice man, but that isn’t what he’s being charged with; this isn’t what the Americans want to extradite him for. His crime was to do some very good journalism, exposing USA / UK war crimes. I do not hear `the church’, which is supposed to have `a voice’ speaking out against this. The only place I could follow developments on this was Craig Murray’s blog: for example
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/your-man-in-the-public-gallery-assange-hearing-day-13/
It seems to me that nowadays, the people with a social conscience, those who are prepared to be martyred for something they believe in, taking a stand against pure radical evil, are not the Christians – and anything which calls itself a church doesn’t seem to have any voice.
So I kind of agree with the comment – if you want to see people with a real social conscience who are prepared to be martyred for it, this still exists, but don’t look to the Christian church.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am sure that they weren’t advocating burning at the stake, and yet it is as well to remember that Christians have done so, quite convinced that they were doing God’s work.
One difficulty can be seen by reaction when, as today, the Church of England has pronounced on Brexit, or when the Pope does so on ecology, there is an outcry saying they should stick to religion. They are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes – they have indeed burned people at the stake – c/f John Calvin burning Servetus at the stake.
I’d more or less agree with those who think that the C. of E. shouldn’t be pronouncing on Brexit – government is basically about keeping the public toilets clean and the roads in good order etc … and I fail to see how the matter of whether this is administered from Brussels or Westminster is a matter which relates to faith and the relationship between man and God.
The Assange case, on the other hand, is absolutely clear cut. He is currently incarcerated in inhuman conditions for the crime of very good journalism, pure and simple.
I’m struggling to find what the role of the church in a believer’s life actually is and I’m having great difficulties in seeing the church as some sort of entity which has a voice which somehow represents me.
I (wrongly and facetiously) brought up the Barmen declaration on another thread, where Karl Barth was utterly alarmed by the fact that the (protestant) church in Germany was subservient to the state and had appropriated some parts of Nazi ideology.
The problem is that the Confessing Church (the movement that he started in opposition) didn’t seem to have much of `a voice’. Barth entitled his huge work `Church Dogmatics’ and not `Christian Dogmatics’; he clearly believed that the church was supposed to play a major role and have `a voice’, but as far as I can see, this was a failure.
One interesting thing I discovered recently. Many years ago I read Emil Brunner’s `Nature and Grace’ where he advocated incorporating some elements of natural theology and I read Karl Barth’s reply `No!’ where he got his water absolutely heated. While I agreed with the points that Barth was making at the time, I didn’t really understand why the tone was quite so vitriolic.
It was only recently (reading a book by TF Torrance) that I found the answer: it was precisely the element of natural theology that had led the German church to go down the road of becoming subservient to the state; one can learn about God through reason and ordinary experience of nature – and, particularly from the heritage of the fine, blond, racially superior German race.
LikeLike