Talk:Calendar of saints (Church of England)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Whose calendar is this?[edit]

Each national church has its own, so I'm curious about the source. Fishhead64 06:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the calendar used by the Church of England, in England (and possibly elsewhere), as given in Common Worship Neddyseagoon 12:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article should either be edited to reflect this fact, and/or expanded to include memorials and commemorations in other Anglican provinces. A table of individuals on one axis, and national churches on the other, is one way of doing this. Another suggestion is severely circumscribing the list, just including those individuals recognised throughout the Communion. Fishhead64 14:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Or just move it to Calendar of saints (Church of England) or Calendar of saints (Anglican, England)? Neddyseagoon 14:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So far as I know, they are all recognised throughout the communion. Neddyseagoon 14:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like that idea. We could have a main article (say "Saints in Anglicanism") with links to offshhot articles on the various national calendars. I know that several figures on the C of E calendar are not commemorated on the Anglican Church of Canada calendar and vice versa. Fishhead64 14:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
consider it done (or started at least)! :-) Neddyseagoon 17:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just fyi, I am Episcopalian, which is part of the Anglican Communion (at least for now) and we follow this calendar. Our cathedral has services every day, and St. Ignatius was mentioned in last night's service (17 Oct).

Link does not work. needs to be changed to https://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-and-worship/worship-texts-and-resources/common-worship/churchs-year/calendar--142.163.194.13 (talk) 12:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wording of the calendar[edit]

Various well-meaning editors have been adding glosses to the official descriptions in the calendar, e.g. "first post-597 Bishop of London", "Major figure of the Catholic Reformation", "founder of Bridgettine Order", etc. etc., as well as changing some details of wording, e.g. "Order of Preachers" to "Dominican Order". I have gone through removing all these changes, in order to restore the text to that given in the official C of E calendar.

The point of this is that the authorised calendar consists not just of the list of commemorations itself, but also (and very nearly as importantly) the text of the calendar as well. A lot of debate went on, not just in deciding who to commemorate, but what exactly to say about them, and some of the descriptions (particularly of figures from the Reformation period) were hard-won agreements between parties with differing perspectives. That is why the text of the calendar is an official, authorised document, which needs to be respected as such. I can quite understand those who just want to put in their favourite snippet of information about this or that saint, or provide a bit of historical context, or change the wording to something they think is a bit clearer; but I would ask everyone to recognise that changing the wording is changing the calendar, and introducing comment which, however valid, belongs elsewhere.

BTW, I have also removed all the entries relating to other parts of the Anglican Communion, which presumably date from before the article was C of E-specific. Vilĉjo 21:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

George Fox??[edit]

Huh? How is George Fox a saint in Anglicanism? That seems totally crazy. john k 16:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If he's in the calendar, he's in the calendar. Fishhead64 01:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thomas More is on there, too. Wonder what he'd think of that. Coemgenus 02:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He's thrilled. The Church Triumphant (in heaven) is non-denominational. Timothy Titus Talk To TT 13:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed rename of article to in accordance with the 1958 Lambeth Conference resolution[edit]

I propose that the article be renamed to The Commemoration of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church in the Anglican Communion - as per comments above George Fox wouldn't be regarded by most as being a saint - ie St George, but he is commemorated, presumably as a hero of the Christian Church.--Golden Wattle talk 22:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another possibility would be Liturgical Calendar (Church of England). This has the possibly slight advantage of using the same phrasing as the Category:Liturgical calendars. I am adding a note to the WikiProject Saints talk page for other opinions as well. John Carter 23:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems a useful and briefer title also removing the reference to saint thereby avoiding some confusion and allowing clarification.--Golden Wattle talk 23:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Liturgical Calendar" is slightly misleading, as this does not include the cycles of Easter, Ordinary Time, Lent, etc. My preference is to remain as titled. Perhaps something like "Feasts and Commemorations (Church of England)" would work as a compromise. I don't know in the C of E, but it does reflect more correctly the Americal Episcopal church usuage ("Lesser Feasts & Fasts"). (As adding to the Saints Wikiproject, commemoration on a Protestant calendar of Feasts/Festivals is roughly the Protestant equivelent to being recognized by the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints). -- Pastordavid 00:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Golden Wattle, thanks for pointing me at this discussion. I've been deliberating about where to start an article for saints/festivals/holy days in the Australian church. (It's been linked from a couple of lists.) I don't know about the CofE but I think it could be helpful to use the actual name of the calendar rather than Saints (which is too restrictive for Anglican practice). The other possibility is that, assuming there is a lot of overlap in different Anglican churches' observations, might it be better to have a single article for observations in the Anglican Communion with notes on national additions? Claudine C. (talk) 04:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From how I understand things we in Anglicanism do not pray to the saints or ask their intercession primarily, to us they are first and foremost examples of perfect Christians...asking their prayers is a secondary thing to us. Therefore to have such people as George Fox on a liturgical calendar, as a lesser feast or commemoration, is correct. I think each Church within the Communion should retain it's own calendars and not go with this new title,The Commemoration of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church in the Anglican Communion. Because each local Church has it's own local heros or "saints" they reflect that in their calendars. I wrote the Calendar of saints (Episcopal Church in the United States of America) , and there are many people in it that would have no business being say in Canada's church calendar. We all have the same Holy Days commemorating Our Lord, Our Lady, and the Apostles, but our local saints and heros reflect the charracter of each local Church. I say keep the article the way it is.--Lord Balin 11:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I continue to believe the use of the word saint is incorrect. How to fix this?--Golden Wattle talk 19:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How else would you call them? These great Christian witnesses are what we in the Anglican Communion call saints. We are a catholic church after all.--Lord Balin 22:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Normally we just don't refer to these modern men and women as St. George Fox, as far as I know we don't use that title for anyone after Charles I.--Lord Balin 22:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As per the resolution of 1958, I htink the term hero of the Christian Church is appropriate - see my original proposal--Golden Wattle talk 23:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The pertinent resolution from the 1958 Lambeth Conference, Resolution 77, reads:
The Conference holds that the purpose of a Calendar is to increase our thankfulness to God and to strengthen our faith by recalling regularly the great truths of the Gospel, the principal events in the life of our Lord, and the lives and examples of men and women who have borne pre-eminent witness to the power of the Holy Spirit, and are with us in the communion of saints.
To me, this would suggest the term "saints" is appropriate - we are all the saints, in keeping with Paul's definition in scripture (e.g., Rom 15:25ff.), as reflected in the title of the Anglican Church of Canada's manual of saints days propers and readings, For All the Saints. Fishhead64 07:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Fishhead, we are all called to be saints. Besides if we rework the calendar for the Church of England into The Commemoration of Saints and Heroes of the Christian Church in the Anglican Communion then theoretically we would have to rework all the other calendars for the entire Communion. Correct me if I'm wrong but what I think Golden Wattle is suggesting is have one article for all the traditional British saints the Communion venerates universally (1st.century-1600), and then have this article for all the more modern saints and heros we place in our calendars. Again I say no, and because of these modern people I say so. Each Church has it's own local "saints", reflected in their calendars accordingly. I think it should stay that way.--Lord Balin 11:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention the fact that one would be hard pressed to discover anything the Communion does universally! But, less facetiously, the categorisation of saints are into days of required observance, and first- and second-class days of optional observance — not days of pre-Reformation saints and post-Reformation saints. The distinction is at best a customary one, and there is already something of a discussion along these lines in the article Saints in Anglicanism. Fishhead64 16:50, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think a big part of the discussion actually revolves around the capital "S" in "Saints", which is basically only done by the Catholics and Orthodox. Most other denominations do use the word to refer to those who are regarded as being in heaven, but with a small "s". I think that in most cases the categories use the small "s", unless the word "Saint" starts the name. Should we change the names of the Protestant Calendars of Saints to use a lower-case "s"? John Carter 20:18, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think it's irrelevant with respect to articles pertaining to the Anglican Communion, since the "s" is always lowercase - as it is in this article, for example. The distinction is maintained in the articles themselves, where the calendars generally list the commemorated by name only, with no prefix. More broadly speaking, the distinction between those canonised by the Catholic Church before the Henrician Acts (designated St.), and those canonised by those Catholic churches remaining in communion with Rome subsequently (not designated St.) is acknowledged informally. Fishhead64 21:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doublecheck calendar for December 17-24?[edit]

Not having been born Anglican, plus as a layperson living "across the pond", I dare not presume to change this calendar page. But I noticed today that the feast of St. Thomas the Apostle somehow was missing from December 21 (the day Episcopalians celebrate him). Also, it seems odd to have no saints listed basically for a calendar week. Just a question...Jweaver28 (talk) 03:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many churches moved St Thomas's Day from 21 December to 3 July, back in the 70s and 80s. The Roman Catholic Church did so in the 1970 review of its calendar. Many Anglican churches followed suit immediately, and the Church of England officially did so with the publication of the ASB Calendar in 1980, continued in the Common Worship Calendar. It was always a very inconvenient day to celebrate an important feast, coming as it did in Advent, often clashing with an Advent Sunday (causing untold liturgical difficulties), and often competing with Christmas carol services and other celebrations. Some Anglican churches have stuck to 21 December, but I believe most have gone over to 3 July. Here in the British Isles the Church of England keeps 3 July, the Church of Ireland keeps 3 July (21 December optional), the Scottish Episcopal Church keeps 3 July, and I think the Church in Wales does so too - though I can't quite find my Welsh prayer book at present to confirm it. Timothy Titus Talk To TT 13:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 5[edit]

Today I noticed on the Holidays and Observances section a feast of Zechariah and Elisabeth (parents of John the Baptist) shown as on both the Orthodox and Anglican calendars, yet it doesn't show on the Church of England's calendar of saints page. One of the pages needs changing, but being across the pond, all I did was add the Episcopal Church commemoration of a Filipino bishop to the Holidays and Observances section, since it appears the Episcopal Church doesn't have a feast day for the Baptist's progenitors. BTW, they might have meant Lutheran rather than Anglican, since the page for the Lutheran calendar lists Zechariah (but not Elisabeth).Jweaver28 (talk) 13:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Advent?[edit]

The article appears to be missing Advent. m.e. (talk) 02:52, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Calendar_of_saints_(Church_of_England)&oldid=1195728464"