King Charles is now not Defender of faith

[Smokeywater]

King Charles is now not Defender of the Faith for Church of England Christian -
in the Sovereign Grant Report 2025-26
Where last year’s report described the King as “Head of the Church of England and Defender of the Faith,” this year’s version reads: “His Majesty is Supreme Governor of the Church of England and protects the space for Faith within the multi-faith nation.”

Doesnt seem a great move to me - he has a historical role as King and messing about with that role diminishes it imv - if you can just change things overnight why not change other things like being crowned in a big carry on by the Archbishop of Canterbury - William can just give that a miss and have a chinwag with a few other religious leaders.

Please tell me where the constitutional change has occurred?

Is the King still the Supreme Governor of the Church of England?

Does the King still formally approves senior clergy appointments?

Does the King still formally approves senior clergy appointments?
Did the King swear a sacred oath at coronation to maintain the Protestant reformed religion and protect the rights, privileges, and settlement of the Church of England?

If your answer is yes to all of the above, then the constitutional role of the King and the Church of England remains unchanged.

I have my own proof from prophecy, but that won't convince you. So I'll leave it there because there's no point talking about it with an atheist.

Why not ?

If you believe atheists are for the fire pit, why are atheists not allowed to discuss it?

If I was to go around saying that people from Iceland, just as an example, should all be tortured for eternity, then I think Icelandic people would be entitled to ask about it.

You can discuss it, but not with me.

Ah. So it's a closed shop then. A bit like a BNP meeting discussing Enoch and his rivers of blood speech.

I think you are going to have a hard time convincing many theists too.

Believers whose only argument is 'this is what I believe, it's true because my book says it is' are not to be debated with. They have abandoned independent thought and can offer nothing of substance, so they do not engage.

People thought the End Times were coming in the year 999. I have lived through so many end if the world prophecies it isn't funny. When I was 16, the end of the world was supposed to hit in 6th period French. My teacher promised no homework if it happened.

We got homework.

@RedTagAlan If you believe atheists are for the fire pit, why are atheists not allowed to discuss it?

Why would an atheist want to discuss something they don't believe in? It makes no sense.

Because there are people among us who want to see the world destroyed, and everyone not in their club thrown into an eternal fire.

I would see that as reason enough for not granting a gun license. Or buying fertilizer in bulk.

What on earth are you talking about ?

Who are these people who "want to see the world destroyed" ?

What is the relevance to buying fertilizer in bulk ?

Are you OK ?

Put it this way. If they were not Christian, there would be people saying their faith is not compatible with human values. Not all of course, but the fundies yes.

It gets a little ridiculous Christians telling us atheists that the end times will impact us when they obviously won’t. They are oblivious to facts and evidence.

@pointythings "Believers whose only argument is 'this is what I believe, it's true because my book says it is' are not to be debated with. They have abandoned independent thought and can offer nothing of substance, so they do not engage."

Indeed, many atheists aren’t willing to consider claims of revelation because they think belief itself, or faith, which all alleged revelation entails to some degree, is not rational and contrary to our dignity as intellectual beings. As popular atheist Richard Dawkins stated in a 2013 Cambridge Union Society debate with Rowan Williams, the former archbishop of Canterbury, religion is “a betrayal of the intellect.”

Suppose, for example, I convince someone without evidence that it’s raining outside. Does the lack of evidence mean that they believe something that is untrue? No, it doesn’t—it could very well be raining outside, in which case their belief would be true.

Perhaps there are, but personally I don't want to see anyone thrown into the fiery pit. I want you to come to faith and have eternal life! It grieves me to see people reject Jesus.

So why does it bother you ?
If there is no fiery pit and no Devil stoking it why get all bent out of shape about it?
If Christians want to be "ridiculous" how does that affect your life ?
Muslims believe that The Holy Prophet Muhammed had a flying horse called Al-Buraq which translates to "lightning". According to Islamic tradition, Buraq served as the mount for Muhammad during the Isra and Mi'raj (the Night Journey from Mecca to Jerusalem, and his subsequent ascension through the heavens).
If Muslims want to believe this, then it's of no matter to me. They have a right to believe whatever they want.

I would agree with you, but people have the right of self-determination.

Yes of course they do.

It doesn’t affect my life - it’s good, don’t want to change anything about it but I still find it ridiculous being told of dreadful things which apparently are going to happen to me! Still surprises me that people go through life without thinking of what is fact v fiction.

Suppose, for example, I convince someone without evidence that it’s raining outside. Does the lack of evidence mean that they believe something that is untrue? No, it doesn’t—it could very well be raining outside, in which case their belief would be true.

True, but in this analogy there is one step you are missing - empirical testing of the hypothesis. It will nearly always be possible to nip outside and ascertain whether or not it is raining. And if it is not possible, the test will have to be deferred. Until then, both parties can agree to believe different things, and accept that their beliefs have equal validity.

In terms of the end times - if you have no stake in preserving the world you live in because you believe that you are one of the elite who will go to a better place, you have no incentive to be a good custodian to it. I found what JD Vance said chilling. As an atheist, I feel I have a duty to look after this world and its people where I can, as best I can and it is scary that there are people calling themselves Christians who feel differently - and have power.

In terms of the end times - if you have no stake in preserving the world you live in because you believe that you are one of the elite who will go to a better place, you have no incentive to be a good custodian to it. I found what JD Vance said chilling. As an atheist, I feel I have a duty to look after this world and its people where I can, as best I can and it is scary that there are people calling themselves Christians who feel differently - and have power.

There's every reason to still be a good custodian because God told us we are the caretakers of His creation. We are to bring children into the world and populate it, so why would we not care about the state of this world? Also, Christians don't think they are 'elites' - we are just like everyone else, the difference is we have accepted Christ's offer of salvation, which is open to everyone. And we don't deserve it!

There's every reason to still be a good custodian because God told us we are the caretakers of His creation. We are to bring children into the world and populate it, so why would we not care about the state of this world? Also, Christians don't think they are 'elites' - we are just like everyone else, the difference is we have accepted Christ's offer of salvation, which is open to everyone. And we don't deserve it!

That is how you feel - it is not how many hardline end times evangelicals in the US feel - and with Trump, they have their finger on the nuclear button.

As for not deserving things - why do you want your God's love to be conditional? Too much of the language of faith is about fear and conditionality. If I had to have a faith, I'd be a pagan - the tenet of 'do no harm' makes a lot of sense to me. Of course you can implement that tenet without believing in a deity.

but I still find it ridiculous being told of dreadful things which apparently are going to happen to me!

So who are these people who are telling you these dreadful things? I think you need better friends !

Not in real life - but have you read Mn?

Well. There is the proven link between evangelicals and climate change denial. And Trump has an evangelical base, and he is a climate change denier.

I would say that is a pretty big global threat.

Sample article here. From the abstract

"Evangelicals have long been suspicious of scientific expertise. About 60% of evangelicals, a group which makes up approximately one‐third of the US population, reject climate change. Many evangelicals allow the Bible to take precedence over science. Various non‐scientific factors contribute to this pervasive skepticism. "

Evangelicals and global warming: A study in science denial (repec.org)

All in Gods plan apparently, is what they say. End of days and all that.

I've no idea why Trump is used as some kind of representation of Christians generally, nor why you focus on US evangelicals when MN is a UK site and most Christians here don't correspond.