On This Day in Tudor History

On October 16, 1555, under Queen Mary I, Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley were burned at the stake he was burnt at the stake, becoming one of the three Oxford Martyrs of Anglicanism and the U.S. Episcopal Church.
Latimer was a Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge, Bishop of Worcester before the Reformation, and later chaplain to Henry VIII's son, King Edward VI. He also served as chaplain to Katherine Duchess of Suffolk until Edward VI's sister, Mary I, came to the throne, he was tried for his beliefs and teachings in Oxford and imprisoned. Ridley was also an English Bishop of London who was tried for his teachings and his support of Lady Jane Grey.

They were both burned at the stake outside Balliol College, Oxford.

The deaths of Latimer, Ridley and later Thomas Cranmer — now known as the Oxford Martyrs — are commemorated in Oxford by the Victorian Martyrs' Memorial which is located near the actual execution site. The Latimer room in Clare College, Cambridge is named after him.

A Tudor-era Business Closes After Almost 500 Years

A 480-year-old British shop announced last week it will close it's doors forever. This shop has survived two depressions, two world wars as well as three
recessions. On Friday, the Daily Mail reported that King Henry VIII was the
reigning monarch when the Gill & Company established its foundations as the
first ironmongers of the country in the year 1530. The shop had its base in
Oxford. Since then it has made a mark and retained the same in terms of one of
the oldest hardware stores of the country. A victim of worldwide recession, it
will be closing down next month month.

Being a native citizen of such an immature country, it is still difficult for me to wrap my brain around modern day people and institutions existing in ancient countries. Likewise, growing up and watching businesses be established, sell
their wares, and shutter their doors--sometimes within a year--makes the mere existence of a Gill & Co. a miracle to me. It sparks my imagination and entertains my brain.

Being human, we can never hope to meet historical figures from 1530, unless there is one hell of a fulfilling afterlife, complete with all our hypothetical dinner party guests. That's why visiting places and touching things that Henry
VIII and Anne Boleyn *may* have touched gives me such a thrill. It's the closest I can get to knowing them.

Gill & Co. began iron mongering in 1530. Let me give you a little perspective in terms of Tudor history, besides just "Henry VIII was the reigning monarch".

In 1530, Henry VIII was wildly in love with Anne Boleyn, lady-in-waiting to his wife, Queen Katherine of Aragon. He had petitioned Pope Clement VII for an annulment and was denied. It was at this time Henry began to consider breaking from Rome and would subsequently name himself head of the Church of England, initiating The Protestant Reformation.

Katherine of Aragon's nephew, Charles V, was crowned Holy Roman Emperor in 1530, further threatening Henry's dream of repudiating his wife and having a legitimate son and heir with Anne. Katherine would live only one more year in the palaces of England.

For her part, Anne had been allowing the king to court her--never giving in to his advances--for the past five years. She survived a bout of the deadly sweating sickness and was now accompanying Henry on progress and hunting. Her greatest political
accomplishment had already taken place in the form of supplanting Cardinal Thomas Wolsey as Henry's closest confidant. Had Wolsey not died of illness in 1530, he likely would have been executed for treason.

It fascinates me that people who lived and reigned in 1530 could have known of Gill & Co. They could not, of course, imagine that almost 500 years later we, too,would know of Gill & Co. and the impending end of their historical business.

The Vatican gets Revenge on Henry VIII!!!

And once again, a woman is at the center of the controversy between the Pope and the Church of England!

Following representations from English Anglicans alarmed by the prospect of women bishops, the Catholic Church has offered them the ultimate remedy. In an extraordinary move and with no forewarning, Pope Benedict XVI has created a structure that will allow conservative male clergy and their congregations to remain Anglican in all but name under female-free Vatican protection.

The details of the new structure have not yet been announced, but presumably the erstwhile Anglicans will be allowed to continue using Anglican worship services in Anglican-style parishes while being officially members of the Catholic Church. Pretty sneaky, huh?

For some time, married Anglican priests have been accepted by Rome while retaining their wives, but only on a case-by-case basis. (Ahem, Cardinal Wolsey, anyone?) Apart from their married status, they have had to forgo the culture of Anglicanism and embrace the fullness of Catholic polity. The new structure seems to offer conservatives the best of both worlds from their perspective.

This is not by any means the first split in the Anglican Church, a church created as a separate entity by Henry VIII in 1534 when an earlier Pope refused to give him permission to divorce Katherine of Aragon. There have been numerous others, caused by disputes over the relationship between church and state. But this one, just like the original split, can be attributed to women.

King Henry wanted his divorce so he could marry Anne Boleyn. Centuries later women bishops are fast becoming a reality for the worldwide Anglican Church. Twenty years after the first woman bishop was consecrated in the US, and 65 years after the first woman priest was ordained by the Bishop of Hong Kong, there are now 24 women bishops around the world, including two in Australia: Kay Goldsworthy in Perth and Bishop Barbara Darling in Melbourne.

A vociferous minority protests that women are not acceptable as leaders in the Anglican Church. This is ironic, given that a woman - Queen Elizabeth II - has been Supreme Governor of the Church of England for the past 57 years, and her ancestor Elizabeth I - Anne Boleyn's daughter - was the monarch who entrenched a reformed Church of England.

Despite these female leaders, some argue that a few verses in the Bible deny women authority over men; these verses were used for centuries to prevent women from having an equal role in society, not just in the church. (Other verses, including the example of Jesus himself, support the full equality of women.)

Those bishops and clergy who petitioned Rome for this indulgence are no doubt mostly conservative clergy who have longed for the security of the Catholic Church for aesthetic, theological and psychological reasons. They want to belong to what they see as the ''true'' church, but either their married state or their sentimental attachment to cultural Anglicanism has held them back. Such longings well pre-date the emergence of women clergy in the Anglican Church.

From the Roman perspective, it is a means of demonstrating to its own restive nuns and lay women that there is no hope of female equality in the foreseeable future. It may, however, lead to some heart-searching for Catholics concerned about the impact that priestly celibacy continues to have on their Church. How can it be unacceptable for home-grown clergy to marry but OK for the imports from Anglicanism?

It will be interesting to see how many Anglican clergy and laity actually go over to Rome and how long they stay. The Anglican Church has a much more democratic polity than the Catholic Church. Anglican vicars and parishes have a significant degree of autonomy and Anglicans have decision-making powers through diocesan and national synods. They participate in the election of their bishops. They help decide how church finances will be spent. Will they adjust easily to the complete obedience required by Papal autocracy? Again.

It's 1533 all over again...