[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Prince Charles
: I am wondering if anybody has any views on whether he should become
: Defender of Faith(i.e. all the faiths) changing it from being sole the
: head of the Church of England???
: Please help as I am troubled on the theological implications of this.
I recall a radio article about the status of Charles and Diana and any
potential future wife a Charles when the first two announced they would be
getting a divorce. The issue that was brought up is could Charles get
divorced, remarry, and remain defender of the faith. Their answer was
yes. The title defender of the faith was given not religiously but by
parliament to, I think, King James I for translating the Bible into
English. (Hence, the King James Version) Since parliament granted the
title, only parliament could take it away. The current defender of the
faith is the Queen.
As long as Charles chose to get divorce under British law and became
remarried is another British church, parliament would have no reason to
revoke the title. The church need not be a CE church but could be
Scottish presbretyrian. With India, and therefore Hinduism, being in the
British Confederacy (I think it is called), along with a host of other
various former colonies which are now independant nations, including
Canada, Austrailia, New Zealand, and Jamaica, I don't see the problem,
especially if the temple is in London's "little India".
So yes, Charles could be defender of the Anglican faith while not being
Anglican. If parliament should choose to revoke or suspend that title,
however, that would be a different matter.
Bests,
Jay
