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.

@RedTagAlan According to figures I have seen only 7% of UK Christians are defined as "Evangelicals" so there's a lot of credence being put onto a very small minority.

US evangelicals are a big bloc on the world stage, that is why.

Want another war in the Mid East to help bring the end times on? That will be US evangelicals. Want the most powerful nation on earth to declare climate change a hoax? That will be the US evangelicals. Want African countries to pass anti gay laws cos Bible? That will be the US evangelicals.

They have massive political clout, and lots of money.

And the way the US political system is set up, it is pretty near impossible for anyone to be elected to POTUS if they are not on side.

GOD, GUNS AND ABORTION.

Or is it

GUNS, GOD AND ABORTION.

See the post I just made re the power of US evangelicals.

So are they spreading this message into UK ? I've never met any.

Yeah not a UK message. Maybe better to take your thoughts to a predominantly US forum?

They don't need to.

Cost of living because of Iran war, say hello to US evangelicals.

What has any of this to do with this thread's discussion on King Charles?

Exactly.
I think two points need to be made. Firstly there is a huge difference in the use of the word "evangelical" between the UK and the USA.
Secondly the Evangelical Alliance in the UK has a large membership which covers many different congregations, even whole denominations, across the UK Protestant churches.
The USA version it isn't relevant here.

Yes. Lol at casually lumping in CofE Christianity with frothing US Evangelicals. While it is a (literally) broad church, I should think that the vast majority of CofE types are streets away from any of that, both politically and theologically.

Hey. It was off on a tangent before I stuck my nose in. ( Away from King Chuck I mean).

So am I to take it you are not disagreeing with me on the power that US evangelicals have over the world ?

Whether any of us agree or disagree isn't relevant to this thread.
Please stop trying to derail it.

No, you're not to take anything, let's get back to good old King Charlie.

OK.

So what do folk think King Chuck can do to defend the faith ?

Throw some atheists on the barbie ?

King Charles. I doubt he follows the Christian faith other than in name only. I think he is more interested in other faith (s).

They absolutely are spreading this message in the UK. They're using Reform for the purpose. It's not necessarily going to work, but people thought Roe vs Wade was established too. Vigilance is essential. I have no problem with Christianity (or any other religion), but extreme branches of all faiths are dangerous.

I think Restore are more in your face about it, but yes, I agree that the money is flowing in. Because it is an odd trinity of things that go on.

First is the business. Lots of money to be made is converting people. Donations etc. Grow the Church and income goes up.

Second is tax. Because the US Evangelical model is conservative. It's an attractive thing for the billionaires to throw money at it. A conservative electorate can save them loads in tax. Likes of the late Charlie Kirk comes to mind.

Third is the thing of saving souls. And that might be genuine with some of the money folk, but money first. And anyway, they get this for free from volunteers.

And don't worry readers, I am getting to the King.

It's a great religion for Kings to subscribe to. Don't worry if this life is shit, the next one is fantastic. Where YOU will live like a King. It's why the whole thing took off with the Romans. It removes the rulers from responsibility. Be happy with your lot, sort of thing.

And on this last bit, I watched "Song of Bernadette" again the other day. 1943. Great film. Jennifer Jones as the Saint, and this line Not seen it in years.

'I cannot promise to make you happy in this world, only in the next.'

I spent a while looking up St Bernadettes bio again. To see how the Christian sites describe it. That line is all over of course, because St Bernadette did say it repeatedly.

And what a cop out it is. Really. Even the Church does not need to do anything for the now. They just need to tell you the next life will be better.

Sister Marie Therese Verzous (Gladyd Cooper) I think her part in the film was superb " In poverty and suffering, because only in suffering can we hope to gain the Kingdom of God"

Her speech at the end is a fantastic performance too. About how she has forced herself to suffer to "feel God", and her anger at Bernadette for having it with no suffering. But of course, she had.

What King or Queen won't sign up to that religion. Suffer this life, and your next will be better.

Most Christians agree about the core things of the faith. There are different denominations with different views about hell though. The Eastern Orthodox church don't seem to believe that hell is a place where unbelievers burn in hell, but are just separate from God.

And what about you Justmerach?

Do you believe in burning in hell ?

I think it depends on what is considered 'core'. The treatment of LGBT people, abortion and female ordination are still causes for much division.

I tend to believe in a pit of hell for at least demons and consider something a bit lighter for non believers who are separate from God especially those who were considered good people otherwise. These are my thoughts and I do not know for sure what hell is like.

I have trouble with the concept of a deity who would punish people just for not believing in it. That smacks of abuse to me. You cannot claim to be all loving and then put conditions on l9ve which have nothing to do with any wrongs done.

In Christian belief we are not sent to hell for not believing in God - even demons believe in God! It's about finding salvation via Jesus Christ. People today do get it wrong when saying 'God is all love' - God is a lot more than that, He is also about justice, amongst other things. He cannot let evil go unpunished. Humanity walked away from God's love very early on after Creation and have continued in disobedience and sinful behaviour. God has provided a way to be forgiven for all that and come back into a relationship with Him, and that's via Jesus. Everyone who hears the Gospel has a choice, to repent and come to salvation via Christ, or to go their own way. Choices have consequences, but it is a choice from your own free will.

It seems to me that you have trouble with any religion because it isn't "logical".

You honestly think that Reform is made up of a bunch of Proselytizing Evangelical Christians ?
Are you aware that Zia Yusuf (Reform spokesperson) is a Muslim, Robert Jenrick's wife is Jewish (they both attend the synagogue together) and Suella Braverman is a Buddhist ?

Immoral more like.

Consider if I started a thread on AIBU. " I gave my dog a home, I feed it, give it a bed and walk it. But it refuses to worship me. AIBU to torture it and throw it into a furnace to endure eternal pain ? YUNBU - it's the Christian thing to do. YABU- you are a nutter and need reported to the RSPCA"