Royals and Religion - A relationship through time

[myrtleWilson]

A few threads this Easter have touched upon the relationship between the RF and religion. There was some really interesting avenues for discussion that didn't focus on who was worshipping where (or not). I offered to start a thread that isn't meant to focus on individuals and criticism but explore the relationship between the two institutions in a 21st century.

With religion (and certainly participation rates) declining in the UK, is it inconceivable that a future monarch (or indeed a future govt) disentangles the R&R's? As we see an increase in personal spirituality, and a connection to what I've seen termed as 'faith in action' with respect to social justice, is that what we may want current/future monarchs to reflect? Is it important to have strong and constant faith or can monarchs (and heirs) acknowledge doubts? Can you have faith without demonstrating faith (as a monarch)

What lessons from history can we learn from and how do our European monarchies engage in this space?

I've attached links to a couple of pieces I stumbled across this weekend - a couple of these were linked to the question is PW religious but as I've suggested, lets try to keep this thread off critiques of individuals! Should also say the links below I've not done a massive deep dive on them - they seem sound but if they have dodgy affiliations I've not uncovered then apologies in advance!

Prince William's doubt is normal - it's impossible to be certain whether there is a God | Seen & Unseen
Prince William ‘is reflecting a discomfort with Christianity in this country’ – SWINDON CHURCH
Church and state in European monarchies | The Constitution Unit Blog

My view, as someone brought up in the Church of England's and who still believes but worships in a different church these days, is that disestablishnent is the best thing that could happen for all involved. Faith and politics are uneasy bedfellows and for faith institutions to be healthy they need to be separate from worldly power structures.

I like that Charles has started to widen the approach by mentioning other faiths but especially when he includes ‘those with no faith’ - in the way that it’s important to acknowledge that you don’t need to be religious to be a good person and you don’t need to be religious to deserve good wishes and the thoughts of someone like the head of state.

Disestablishment is essential now.
And get rid of the blooming religious state funded schools.

KC3 is the current Head of the Church and has spoken directly to reporters about his faith.

W has not spoken directly to reporters on his faith and the headlines are pure speculation. He is not the current Head of Church.

It is remarkable that the OP found 2 negative news items speculating on W's faith but nothing on the current Head of the Church KC3. 🙄

Just to clarify @My2cents1975 I didn't actually read those two articles as critical - more thought provoking and as I said in my OP (and on another thread) there were lots of references to it 'being commonly known that PW wasn't religious' I went down a rabbit hole and found that these comments often linked back to 1 book - and I found the two articles as part of that rabbit hole. As I said, I was interested in the wider conversation not individuals.

It's an interesting topic. Thanks for starting this thread.

As I said on one of the other threads, the King is in a strange position in being Supreme Governor of an established church which only a small minority of British citizens actively worship in. And that number is getting smaller all the time. The CoE really plays very little role in British life these days. In a recent YouGov survey, only a minority even of those who identify as Anglican could name the current Archbishop of Canterbury!

Disestablishment, as has happened in other European monarchies such as Sweden and Norway, even if the Church of Norway is still in many ways a state church, might seem like the next step. But it would be a major historical shift and I'm not sure if there is any appetite for it among the 'ruling classes'?

Doesn't he also have a responsibility to defend the independence of the Church of Scotland? I remember something being mentioned in the Proclamation ceremony but not the details.

Yes, I think he is 'Protector of the True Protestant Church of Scotland', or something like that.

However, the Church of Scotland is Calvinist and recognises no earthly leader. So the Monarch has no formal role in the governance of the CoS.

Lucky Church of Scotland!

I really wish we could bring in a separation of church and state, although the US has that and it doesn't seem very effective.

Many European monarchs are RC, and are therefore not heads of an established church.

Through the centuries since the Henrician Reformation, the CoE functioned as an administrative arm of the state. That role is now greatly diminished, but the church remains Established. It's a strange beast, seeking a moral and religious role with wide appeal but still stuck in its role as an appendage of the state within the constitutional framework of the Glorious Revolution and as set forth by the Act of Settlement of 1701.

I was taken aback that someone on here made comments about PW not going to church at Easter and will one day become head of the C of E and then of course it came out that he had quietly gone to church at Sandringham. I think the RF are starting to catch up with the rest of the country - slowly!

It is extremely effective, especially in the role the principle plays in education.

It guarantees the freedom of religion and of religious organisations and others to run their own schools, hospitals, universities, and any other institutions the organisations can afford to maintain without being dependent on the state for finances, under the law.

I was thinking about the influence the evangelical right has on the Republican party, but you are correct that in most things it does work. I misspoke.

The Church of Scotland is also an established church, so there's no real separation of church and state there either.

Oh goodness I thought they had got away!

What difference does it make in practical terms? Scotland has complete freedom of religion, as does England.

I think it makes a difference to the church to be formally linked to the State. Theological questions become nor complex when you have to think about political links as well.

I wonder who was the last monarch to actually believe in god.

I thought that TLQ and the current King have both talked about their faith in God?

No worries! I think I many have been a bit shirty from the other thread that has gone bonkers so apologies for that.

I'd put money on the late Queen being a believer!

Strong faith includes recognising phases of doubt, no?

My feeling is that the King is more agnostic in his personal beliefs but that he is a believer in something bigger than ourselves.

I’m talking about what they genuinely believed, privately, not the sort of official guff you have to trot out when you’re a royal who has ridiculous amounts of anachronistic wealth and status because of a position which also, ridiculously, includes you being head of the C of E.

I mean, hard to imagine Edward VIII, a spoilt, weak, proto-fascist playboy who didn’t go to church, as any kind of believer.

I'd say that's HM King Charles III, tbh.
And, the last before him was HM Queen Elizabeth II.