The British monarch has been head of the Church of England since the 1534 Break with Rome. But Prince William could, as king, do away with this tradition of almost half a millennium and split official ties with the Church.
That is according to a report last week in The Times. Traditionalists should be concerned by the suggestion, even if for no other reason than that their liberal opponents are so excited by it.
“Hereditary monarchy is a dubious enough concept as it is without religious mumbo-jumbo,” writes Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins in an article which urges the future king to “sever the ridiculous ties of church and state.”
‘Small-c’ conservative writer and columnist at The Mail on Sunday Peter Hitchens unsurprisingly took the complete opposite line, writing that if we don’t believe in the idea the King is chosen by God and rules in God’s name, “there is no purpose in having a king, or a prince of Wales. We might as well have a president in a nice suit.” He added:
If William cannot be bothered with the Church, then he cannot really be bothered with monarchy either. And if he does not believe in it, why should anyone else?
The Times article uses as its source an upcoming book by journalist and esteemed royal biographer Robert Hardman. He writes: “In royal circles, it is no secret that [the Prince of Wales] does not share the King’s sense of the spiritual, let alone the late Queen’s unshakeable devotion to the Anglican church.” Hardman also quotes a “senior” figure from Buckingham Palace:
His father is very spiritual and happy to talk about faith but the Prince is not. He doesn’t go to church every Sunday, but then nor do the large majority of the country. He might go at Christmas and Easter but that’s it. He very much respects the institutions but he is not instinctively comfortable in a faith environment.
Church Times writer Madeleine Davies said she was “unsurprised” by this insider image.
The real question is whether his dissociation from the Church of England is so strong as to encourage William to break official ties with it.
Royal historian Marlene Koenig told The European Conservative that this is mere “speculation,” however, she added that Britain is “a country where religion is in decline, and this includes the Church of England, which is in serious decline, with far fewer people going to church regularly.” With this in mind,
It is a moot point what role William will choose when he succeeds to the throne. People saying they are Christians has fallen to about 46% in the UK. The real question should be, what is the Anglican church doing to fill its pews, reaching out to young people? If this decline continues there may not be a serious Church of England when William becomes king.
What we can now say is quite likely is that William’s coronation will, as Hardman writes, be “less spiritual.” And this really is only a step forward from the current King’s decision to mark himself not merely as the Defender of the Faith but as defender of faiths.
It is just as certain that the likes of Simon Jenkins will be very pleased by this development. The fact William doesn’t worship much “is hardly worth a shrug,” he writes. “Perhaps the Prince is just a normal human being.”
Will Future King William Really Split Ties With the Church?
Prince William
Photo: 360b / Shutterstock.com
The British monarch has been head of the Church of England since the 1534 Break with Rome. But Prince William could, as king, do away with this tradition of almost half a millennium and split official ties with the Church.
That is according to a report last week in The Times. Traditionalists should be concerned by the suggestion, even if for no other reason than that their liberal opponents are so excited by it.
“Hereditary monarchy is a dubious enough concept as it is without religious mumbo-jumbo,” writes Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins in an article which urges the future king to “sever the ridiculous ties of church and state.”
‘Small-c’ conservative writer and columnist at The Mail on Sunday Peter Hitchens unsurprisingly took the complete opposite line, writing that if we don’t believe in the idea the King is chosen by God and rules in God’s name, “there is no purpose in having a king, or a prince of Wales. We might as well have a president in a nice suit.” He added:
The Times article uses as its source an upcoming book by journalist and esteemed royal biographer Robert Hardman. He writes: “In royal circles, it is no secret that [the Prince of Wales] does not share the King’s sense of the spiritual, let alone the late Queen’s unshakeable devotion to the Anglican church.” Hardman also quotes a “senior” figure from Buckingham Palace:
Church Times writer Madeleine Davies said she was “unsurprised” by this insider image.
The real question is whether his dissociation from the Church of England is so strong as to encourage William to break official ties with it.
Royal historian Marlene Koenig told The European Conservative that this is mere “speculation,” however, she added that Britain is “a country where religion is in decline, and this includes the Church of England, which is in serious decline, with far fewer people going to church regularly.” With this in mind,
What we can now say is quite likely is that William’s coronation will, as Hardman writes, be “less spiritual.” And this really is only a step forward from the current King’s decision to mark himself not merely as the Defender of the Faith but as defender of faiths.
It is just as certain that the likes of Simon Jenkins will be very pleased by this development. The fact William doesn’t worship much “is hardly worth a shrug,” he writes. “Perhaps the Prince is just a normal human being.”
READ NEXT
Milei Disrupts the Cosy Consensus at the G20
The Albanian Conservative Institute: An Intellectual Beacon for Albania’s Center-Right
Brussels Opens Path to ‘Fiscal Fascism’