It’s uncommon for an Anglican bishop to say something clear. When one does, my conviction that most Western Anglican bishops are working hard to hasten the demise of the religion they have vowed to defend is rarely disabused.
From here:
The former Bishop of Oxford, Lord Harries of Pentregarth, has said readings from the Koran should feature in the next Coronation, when Prince Charles succeeds to the Throne.
Here is the interview:
The Koran can be read only in Arabic, so there would have to be an interpreter. “Let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue …” Perhaps this Bp. will volunteer?
As our dear friend Martin would say; “Poppycock!”
From his perspective, this makes perfect sense (even if not from ours). Richard Harries has always been very liberal and he served for years on the Church of England’s inter-faith panel. In addition, Prince Charles has said more than once that he would rather be known as the defender of faiths than the defender of the faith.
For reference, Richard Harries was also one of the prime movers behind the failed bid to make openly gay Jeffrey John Bishop of Reading, which is in the Diocese of Oxford.
I’m sure he gets a thrill every time he baits “conservatives”. But then, as the appointee of the secular, he was made bishop to do just that. It is idle to complain that a worthless man appointed to office for his lack of principle is unprincipled.
I don’t see what the big deal is. They read the Gospel and pay no attention to it. The Koran will have no impact either.
Big deal for the following reasons: CofE is not a Christian church despite some Christians remaining in it; CofE is supported by UK taxpayers, among whom are many Muslims; the crowned head of the UK is no Christian majesty or defensor fidei, titles notwithstanding; the UK government is not a Christian government, but a representative government of all of its citizens. Frankly, it’s way past time to end the farce.
The C of E is not supported by taxpayers. It does not receive any money at all from government.
Kirk,
You may be a skeptic, I’m sarcastic.
The Coronation Service, as do most services in the Book of Common prayer, includes the Lord’s Prayer, which should satisfy most other monotheistic religions.
It also contains the following words of presentation
as The Monarch receives The Holy Bible:
“Here is the Wisdom.
This is the royal Law.
These are the lively Oracles of GOD.”
It’s part of this “coexist” and “other faiths are legitimate” crap. Fits right in with the being “inclusive” of everything (and therefore standing for nothing) nonsense. Sadly this fool does not see that Christianity is the only religion that proclaims the Divinity of Jesus Christ, and that it therefore cannot “coexist” with the other religions. All other religions contradict Christianity by saying the Jesus Christ is not God, and in turn that makes them all illegitimate!
To be accurate, religions which existed before Christ say nothing at all about him.
Hello Priscilla,
Hope all is well with you.
The pre-Christ Judaism has many prophesies of the coming Messiah.
My comment was about our present, not of a time more than two thousand years ago.
That being said you do make a good and interesting point. What of those people who existed in times and places where and when they would not have had the opportunity to know Jesus Christ? Such as North American Indians in the 800’s. What redemption and saving Grace was there for these souls? Someday I will invest time and effort to learn more about this issue.
Sincerely,
AMPisAnglican
This was a question which naturally occurred to the Early Fathers. And which ought to worry us. Please see this article of mine:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/article/20141124013550-135532881-the-sheep-and-the-goats-who-are-they?trk=prof-post
Of this paper Michael Green said that one glance at the NT concordance showed that the argument was sound. If this is so, the Lord Himself did not leave us without guidance in the matter.
Thank you for your continuing insights.
The title “Defender of the Faith” was bestowed upon Henry VIII by the Pope (before the English Reformation). It is an inherited title that has been passed down to succeeding Monarchs. It cannot be changed by an Act of Parliament because Parliament never bestowed it. If Charles prefers to be called “defender of faith” (a non-Christian title) than he is going to have to publically denounce the Christian title. But in this secular “lets all coexist” and be “inclusive” nonsense I doubt that such a proclamation would cause any issues.
Yes – the title ‘Fidei Defensor’ was a papal gift (to assuage Henry’s jealousy at the title ‘Most Christian King’ bestowed by the same Pope upon his rival Francis I of France. Its meaning has (as noted above) altered (metamorphosed) significantly since then – so a change to ‘Defender of Faiths’ might not be that great a stretch. And there is nothing stopping Parliament from altering the new King’ style if it chooses (contrary to the above). The more crucial title here is ‘Supreme Governor of the Church of England’, which a future king will also inherit. It is not clear from the Prince’s public speeches exactly how he would view that (although one might hazard a guess). Of course, the effective powers of that title are exercised by the Monarch in Council (ie the Prime Minister – through Parliament), so the monarch’s personal views may not matter much.