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.

Seems I need to apologize. I said it was more Restore than Reform, and what is the news today ? Reform caught taking US money. People stepping down, one of them James Orr , a theologian with links to Peter Thiel. And those two share some odd evangelical beliefs apparently.

Sorry for the tangent. I thought it was worth a mention.

Well good luck with that one. I can't see you'll get many takers.

They tried it in Spain from 1939 - 1975 after a bloody civil war that left 200,000 troops dead, 150,000 civilians executed for being on the "wrong" side, 10,000s dead from disease or starvation. In addition 450,000 civilians fled Spain and 200,000 never returned.
Is this what you want for UK ? Really ?
And hey-ho guess what ? The people didn't like it and brought back the Monarchy in 1975 under Juan Carlos after the dictator Franco died.

Why should the monarchy be aligned to the Church of England when the majority of the population aren’t?

I can't answer your question because I'm not a specialist in Constitutional Law.

Maybe because the UK does not actually have a constitution.

History, tradition, laws, culture. It’s hard to disentangle but each country has their own version.

You are mistaken.
the United Kingdom has a constitution, but it is uncodified and unwritten in the sense that it is not contained in a single master document.

Parliamentary sovereignty is a thing though. Parliament is the highest authority. It can create laws and remove laws. If some 1762 act has an issue, Parliament can just do an act to remove it.

Unless you are an expert in Constitutional Law I suggest you keep your half-baked opinions to yourself.

And any law or act can be changed by Parliament.

And the King has untested powers really. If he decides to change something that does not come under parliament, he can. Because he is the King.

Edit to add.

We saw that recently with Andrew. There was lots of discussion about how he could be stripped of his title. In the end it was the King. He should wrote it down and published it. Andrew is stripped of his titles.

Not an opinion. That is fact.

What? That you're an expert in Constitutional Law? I don't think so !

The UK Parliament website is wrong then ?

I don't know.

Idk about the complexities without looking for more but yes if they have mandate perhaps so.

That takes a vote and raising it with the electorate can drive voters to other parties, so it’s a risk for the one who wants to gain power.

I didn't mention abolishing the monarchy, I mentioned disestablishing the Church of England. Plenty of countries have a monarchy who isn't head of any Church.

Given that you have now (deliberately) misunderstood someone who has actually looked stuff up and also completely misunderstood a post of mine, maybe you should take a break, have a cuppa and then return to the fray?

A Bill to that effect was put forward by Lord Scriven in the Lords on 6 December 2023. It had one reading and failed.

Doesn't mean it was a bad idea. Also doesn't mean that our monarch's wish to represent multifaith Britain is a bad idea. You may not like it, but we have the freedom to believe, or not, and should all have fair and equitable treatment within the law from those who govern us.

Interesting. I think it’s a risk politically for any party who wants power, so they’ll leave it as is.

Nothing to do with any mandate. Parliament is the authority. It can make laws or remove laws. If a court says a law it makes breaks a law, then Parliament can vote to remove that law.

Mandate does not come into it.

Of course mandate counts, we’re a representative democracy.

Doesn't mean it was a bad idea.

Maybe, maybe not, but it got no support and that's what matters.

Who has the power to abolish the UK Monarchy ?

You're the expert, you tell us?
I can think of assassination but that's taking a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.