Charles’s instincts are to be applauded – but 1,000 years of tradition are at stake
ALMOST 30 years ago, the then Prince Charles sparked a firestorm by signalling that, as King, he’d want a fundamental shift in the relationship between Church and Crown. He suggested dropping the time-honoured ‘Defender of the Faith’ title which, as head of the Church of England, all monarchs since Henry VIII have held.
Instead, mindful of our multi-faith nation, he would rather be known as ‘Defender of Faith’ – a protector of all religious beliefs.
Many religious experts were alarmed at this modernising, warning that it would put him at odds with centuries of tradition, with the Establishment and with the beliefs of his mother.
Charles has since retracted his ‘Defender of Faith’ ambitions, making it clear that, although he is head of the Anglican Church, he would still act to safeguard other beliefs.
Yet, barely four weeks away from his Coronation, he is still wrestling with how to ensure his new role accords with his realm’s many non-Christian faiths.
This issue raises a profound question. Is it wise for the Christianity of the Coronation – an ancient ceremony dating back more than 1,000 years – to be diluted so that, in the name of diversity, other faiths are included?
Charles’s natural and generous instinct is to involve them actively.
As he said in 1994: ‘I happen to believe that the Catholic subjects of the Sovereign are as important [as Protestants], not to mention the Islamic, Hindu and Zoroastrian.’
The trouble is the Coronation cannot be upended at the whim of a King, even if he is Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Anglican canon law effectively rules out representatives of other faiths being actively involved in services if those faiths do not accept the Holy Trinity of Christian doctrine – the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
Westminster Abbey comes under the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury. And with Justin Welby being constantly scrutinised by his hardline, traditional critics in the worldwide Anglican Communion, he is unlikely to accept the Coronation becoming a multifaith extravaganza rather than a religious service that reinforces the Church of England as the Established Church.
I am told these grave tensions between modernisation and tradition explain why the Coronation order of service has still not been made public. Meanwhile, there is speculation that Charles will hold a separate ceremony where other faith leaders would play an active role. This would be entirely appropriate. While it is reasonable to want a service that reflects modern Britain, the temptation must be resisted to turn the crowning of our monarch upside down and inside out.