Ship of Fools: St Charles, King and Martyr

Thread: St Charles, King and Martyr Board: Ecclesiantics / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=008448

Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on :

Did anyone make it along to Banqueting House (or St Clement's Philly which hosted the US SCKM mass)?

I attempted the daily evening mass at a local Anglo Catholic place only to arrive to find the daily evening mass had been suspended some time ago (despite the church sign still advertising it).

So no Blessed Charles for me.

Do any of the (small) number of parishes in the UK dedicated to St Charles do anything particularly special?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

King Charles, Tunbridge Wells, has in the past observed His Majesty's day on the nearest Sunday, with a full-on 1662 BCP Choral Evensong. They kept it this year last Sunday, according to their website, but there does not appear to have been a 'special' service.

Something of a 'niche interest', no?

IJ

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

It's not just the ACs.... Kidderminster, where I grew up was obviously the parish of Richard Baxter (his statue stands outside the parish church) but, by an unusual coincidence, it's also the only town to have received it's charter from Charles I. The high school, the former grammar, is King Charles I High School.

Anyway.... as a mark of penance post the Restoration, the rector of the parish, lineal successor to Baxter, has to lead prayers of penance for the martyrdom of Charles I in the town centre every January 30th. It's not a remotely AC parish. They do it because they have to, although I'm not sure what the legal position is or where the authority came from. Charles II I assume.

As a Kiddy boy, just down the road from Worcester (the "Faithful City"), I've always had a soft spot/blind spot for Charles I.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

I've long had trouble treating both Charles I and Laud (whom we remembered a few days ago) as martyrs for their faith. Executed for their political actions yes, but not for their faith.

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I've long had trouble treating both Charles I and Laud (whom we remembered a few days ago) as martyrs for their faith. Executed for their political actions yes, but not for their faith.

This precisely. His execution was not something most of us republicans could support now, and Cromwell's theocratic regime and brutal suppression of the Irish even less so, but if Charles I is to be judged "according to the standards of his time", as is so often said whenever the brutality of human history is addressed, then so must Cromwell. And on that basis I have to be relieved that Charles I lost the Civil Wars and so paved the way for a non-executive constitutional monarchy, which is the next best thing to no monarchy at all.

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I've long had trouble treating both Charles I and Laud (whom we remembered a few days ago) as martyrs for their faith. Executed for their political actions yes, but not for their faith.
This precisely. His execution was not something most of us republicans could support now, and Cromwell's theocratic regime and brutal suppression of the Irish even less so, but if Charles I is to be judged "according to the standards of his time", as is so often said whenever the brutality of human history is addressed, then so must Cromwell. And on that basis I have to be relieved that Charles I lost the Civil Wars and so paved the way for a non-executive constitutional monarchy, which is the next best thing to no monarchy at all.

OTOH I do see both Laud and Charles I as martyrs for/of the faith - but then if we started the Civil War/War of the 3 Kingdoms again tomorrow I'd join the Royalists against Parliament so I suppose I would say that.

But then the Society of King Charles the Martyr is smaller than Republic (and that's pretty small). So I think ultimately so long as we can have a beer together neither of us are likely to see our aims of either the abolition of the monarchy or January 30th's full restoration to the CofE Calendar any time soon!

Incidentally a further irony that's just struck me since my original post is to wonder what Baxter would have made of there being a statue of him? Never occurred to me in 36 years of knowing the town til now - can't think he'd be happy!

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
if Charles I is to be judged "according to the standards of his time", as is so often said whenever the brutality of human history is addressed

who was it that said Charles I was a good man and a bad king? I can stand squarely with that.

Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :

From memory, it was Hyde (Clarendon).

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

Tuesday 30th January 1649 - Monday 30th January 2017

Yes, I got there at Whitehall for the Solemn Eucharist, at which the preacher was Revd. Dr. Peter Anthony, parish priest of St. Benet Kentish Town. As in previous years, it was traditional rite.

Last year 2016, it was at Hampton Court, when I also got there; but this year, it was back at Whitehall.

Posted by teddybear (# 7842) on :

Are the propers for the feast online somewhere?

Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on :

As an aside to this discussion, This site has a pattern for the lacy vest supposedly worn by him on day of execution. Scroll past pattern for picture of vest. The pattern is well known as King Charles Brocade.

Just picking up needles and yarn and will get my coat on the way out.

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by teddybear:
Are the propers for the feast online somewhere?

The feast was included in the 1662 BCP, but in a separate section toward the back. You should be able to find it online.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

The propers are in my 1828 edition of the BCP, but I gather they were removed in 1859.

Here is a link to the 1662 and 1844 versions:

http://www.eskimo.com/~lhowell/bcp1662/state/index.html

Hardly surprising, perhaps, that the Merry Monarch chose thuswise to commemorate the plot of 1605, the death of his father, and his own return to the throne.

IJ

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Just noticed that all these services were removed from the BCP in 1859 by order of Queen Victoria.

IJ

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :

I believe Common Worship uses the Common of Martyrs but has a particular collect for King Charles.

Posted by american piskie (# 593) on :

Proper propers: I have seen hard copy of an insert for the altar copy of the English Missal, with all the usual propers for that rite.

Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Just noticed that all these services were removed from the BCP in 1859 by order of Queen Victoria.

IJ

The Key aim of the devotional Society of King Charles the Martyr is to have them put back in!

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Can't see it happening whilst usurpers of the Hanoverian succession are still occupying the throne....

....I'll get me hat on the way out.

IJ

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Can't see it happening whilst usurpers of the Hanoverian succession are still occupying the throne....

....I'll get me hat on the way out.

IJ

I hope that it's a tricorne.

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

But of course - no good Jacobin would wear anything else on his heid!

IJ

Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
But of course - no good Jacobin would wear anything else on his heid!

IJ

Surely a tartan bonnet would also be acceptable?

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

Och no - that's for the wild Hielanders!

IJ

Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Och no - that's for the wild Hielanders!

IJ

Ah, I'm mixing up Jacobins and Jacobites.

Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :

Actually, I was confused. I read Jacobin as a party of the French Revolution! They often went bare headed. (Often ending up headless, much like our subject here.)

[ 03. February 2017, 21:30: Message edited by: Pangolin Guerre ]

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :

You are quite right, of course - I meant Jacobite (but my point re hats still applies).

I blame my confusion on (a) the French part of my ancestry, and (b) a rather fine single malt from the Scottish part of my ancestry.

I'll close the door behind me - please don't get up...

IJ

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0