Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No Catholic Burial for Richard III
First Things ^ | 8/6/13 | Mark Movsesian

Posted on 08/06/2013 3:58:20 PM PDT by marshmallow

Readers of First Things probably know this already, but here’s a follow up on a story from earlier this year. In February, archaeologists confirmed that they had discovered the remains of King Richard III beneath a parking lot in Leicester. Richard died in battle at Bosworth Field in August 1485; the Tudor victors gave him a rather unceremonious burial in what was then a local abbey. Richard will now be re-interred in Leicester’s Anglican cathedral, most likely next May. Back in February, some Catholics objected that Richard, who was Catholic, should by rights be buried in a Catholic ceremony in a Catholic sanctuary. According to the Law and Religion UK blog, however, the Catholic Church in the UK will not insist. The Catholic Bishop of Nottingham states:

The Bishop is pleased that the body of King Richard III has been found under the site of Greyfriars Church in Leicester, in which it was buried following the Battle of Bosworth in 1485, and that it will be reinterred with dignity in the city where he has lain for over five hundred years......

(Excerpt) Read more at firstthings.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; History; Mainline Protestant
KEYWORDS: england; godsgravesglyphs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

1 posted on 08/06/2013 3:58:20 PM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Will the Mormons baptize him?


2 posted on 08/06/2013 4:04:38 PM PDT by Rio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rio

I’m thinking they should have a proxy person who’ll at one time baptize all the dead. Then it’d be over.


3 posted on 08/06/2013 4:06:24 PM PDT by SkyDancer (Live your life in such a way that the Westboro church will want to picket your funeral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Very strange. There was no Anglcan Church when he died? Why should he be buried anywhere other than a Catholic cemetary given the fact that he known to have been Catholic?
4 posted on 08/06/2013 4:08:07 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Ecumenicalism has screwed up a whole BUNCH'a thought processes.

If the guy's Catholic ... he should be in a Catholic cemetery.

How did the state enter into the negotiations and why is the Bishop so acquiescent ?

5 posted on 08/06/2013 4:08:36 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rio

They probably already have.


6 posted on 08/06/2013 4:11:09 PM PDT by The Unknown Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rio

Will the Mormons baptize him?

I think they can baptize many times.


7 posted on 08/06/2013 4:11:35 PM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Richard III was a member of the Church of England, which happened to be allied with Rome at his death, and later, broke with Rome.

It’s perfectly fit and proper, and legal, that her majesty’s government and the Church of England inter his remains as they see fit.


8 posted on 08/06/2013 4:12:59 PM PDT by AnalogReigns (because the real world is not digital...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Exactly. If his momma call him Clay, Imma call him Clay.


9 posted on 08/06/2013 4:13:15 PM PDT by The Unknown Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

Because the CoE claims to go as far back as the Christianization of England, not simply when Henry VIII broke away from Rome.

I think it’s a dubious argument, but that’s what I’ve seen presented so far.


10 posted on 08/06/2013 4:13:51 PM PDT by Shadow44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Well, it is Richard III. He’s not exactly a hill to die on when it comes to claiming monarchs.


11 posted on 08/06/2013 4:15:56 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Good point.

Trying to get on the Queen’s side? Money?


12 posted on 08/06/2013 4:17:10 PM PDT by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
He’s not exactly a hill to die on when it comes to claiming monarchs.

Good point.

13 posted on 08/06/2013 4:23:24 PM PDT by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Grrr. This aggravates me tremendously.


14 posted on 08/06/2013 4:28:30 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge ("we are pilgrims in an unholy land")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin

They haven’t finished their sacrilege.


15 posted on 08/06/2013 4:29:17 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge ("we are pilgrims in an unholy land")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Will there be a wake at the local pub?


16 posted on 08/06/2013 4:32:18 PM PDT by forgotten man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shadow44

It’s a lie. It’s a lie that attacks the historical truth that Henry V and all the plantagenets were Catholic.

Apparently some would rather believe that Mary brought her Catholicism from Spain.


17 posted on 08/06/2013 4:32:30 PM PDT by JCBreckenridge ("we are pilgrims in an unholy land")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
"When his brother Edward IV died in April 1483, Richard was named Lord Protector of the realm for Edward's son and successor, the 12-year-old King Edward V. As the young king travelled to London from Ludlow, Richard met and escorted him to lodgings in the Tower of London where Edward V's brother Richard joined him shortly afterwards. Arrangements were made for Edward's coronation on 22 June 1483, but before the young king could be crowned, his father's marriage to his mother Elizabeth Woodville was declared invalid, making their children illegitimate and ineligible for the throne. On 25 June, an assembly of lords and commoners endorsed the claims.
The following day, Richard III began his reign, and he was crowned on 6 July 1483. The young princes were not seen in public after August, and a number of accusations circulated that the boys had been murdered on Richard's orders, giving rise to the legend of the Princes in the Tower."
Source: Wikipedia

*****************************

Ah, well.

18 posted on 08/06/2013 4:32:49 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Does it matter if he’s in a Catholic cemetary?


19 posted on 08/06/2013 4:34:52 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch (http://thegatwickview.tumblr.com/ http://thepurginglutheran.tumblr.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

I thought it did ... to Catholics.


20 posted on 08/06/2013 4:36:26 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson