Has the Catholic Church ever received compensation from the Church of England?

[Jbrady]

Pope St Gregory famously told St Augustine of Canterbury to convert pagan temples into Christian churches.

There are eleven churches in Rome that are converted Pagan temples.

 

[Maximian]

Actually the current break with Rome goes back to the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement after James II was expelled by a Protestant military coup of William of Orange in the so-called Glorious Revolution of 1689. Since then British monarchs have varied from the mediocre to the odious, with the possible exceptions of the much maligned George III and the shy George VI.

 

[PickyPicky]

Since then British monarchs have varied from the mediocre to the odious, with the possible exceptions of the much maligned George III and the shy George VI

Georges III and VI I would agree, and I would add Elizabeth II to the exceptions, and perhaps Wm III. I suppose you could call Victoria mediocre, except she was such an interesting character. Of course there is no harm in constitutional monarchs being mediocre, it’s almost part of the job description.

 

[Maximian]

Sorry but though Im a devoted monarchist I don’t think Queen Elizabeth II has been a good queen. Her idea of monarchy is at all costs to avoid controversy (ie responsibility). What’s the point of that?

 

[Krisdun]

The UK monarchy does not have the same power as it used to in the past in terms of ruling the country (although they have retained their wealth and status). Monarchs present and future will tend to stay neutral (at least publicly) and not want to meddle in politics and religious issues (unless as you suggest a colourful character turns up). They are also worried that if people start to turn against them this could eventually result in the monarchy being abolished. In such a scenario I wonder what would happen to the CoE in terms of losing their ‘Supreme Governor’? Would they still get the same level of support from the state? How would it impact on their following?

 

[PickyPicky]

Sorry but though Im a devoted monarchist I don’t think Queen Elizabeth II has been a good queen. Her idea of monarchy is at all costs to avoid controversy (ie responsibility). What’s the point of that?

I would argue that avoiding controversy is the point of that, or at any rate an important part of it.

They are also worried that if people start to turn against them this could eventually result in the monarchy being abolished. In such a scenario I wonder what would happen to the CoE in terms of losing their ‘Supreme Governor’? Would they still get the same level of support from the state? How would it impact on their following?

More likely that disestablishment would precede a republic, is my guess. And what do you mean about “the current level of support”? The. CofE is not state-funded.

It would simply do without a supreme governor.

 

[Krisdun]

Unless the CoE receives some form of help they are looking at a dire future with rapidly falling attendances at services in the UK. Would the state just let the CoE die off?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/church-england-uk-young-adults-identify-british-social-attitudes-a8527136.html

 

[PickyPicky]

Would the state just let the CoE die off?

I don’t know. Certainly its disappearance worries me, because I see no alternative player to reproduce its rôle at the centre of communities.

 

[GKMotley]

I hold that interesting characters should not be called mediocre. Interesting is sufficient.

 

[PickyPicky]

Which of us, after all, wouldn’t settle for being called “interesting”

 

[GKMotley]

I have achieved the distinction.

With clasp.

 

[ltwin]

In such a scenario I wonder what would happen to the CoE in terms of losing their ‘Supreme Governor’?

Not much, since the Queen’s role as “Supreme Governor” is ceremonial now. Parliament could legally exercise authority over the Church of England, but it won’t because that would be violating the church’s independence and it’s already delegated legislative authority over the church to the CofE’s General Synod. So, actually the General Synod is the real center of authority in the CofE. If the monarchy were to end today, the CofE’s actual governance would not change at all, unless something drastic happened like Parliament trying to abolish it entirely or something.

 

[ltwin]

I hear some evangelical CofE churches in the London area have some success attracting young and socially mobile people. I’m thinking of churches in the mold of Holy Trinity Brompton, which has planted new congregations in several closed Anglican churches around the London area.

 

[Krisdun]

It is a bit strange to me that as Supreme Governor the Queen has no real (name removed by moderator)ut or say in how the CoE is run or what direction it is taking. I mean what if the CoE took a direction (e.g. women bishops, lgbt acceptance etc.) that she may not tolerate herself? In my opinion she strikes me as being a more traditional Anglican in that sense.

 

[PickyPicky]

I was thinking really of its rôle in rural communities. Where I live now it was just assumed that it would be the parish church that organised the foodbank; the school is CofE; the church is the only building big enough for major events (the election hustings were held there, for instance); the vicar is one of the key people to get involved when things need done.

What happens when the CofE fades away I just don’t know. It couldn’t be the RC, that’s just a handful of people in a chapel whose priest lives in a town 15 miles away where his main church is. The Methodist and URC churches don’t have ministers living locally. Difficult.

 

[dochawk]

Yes but in justice that land when freehold can only be seized in very extreme circumstances.

With “I have a bigger army than you” being such an “extreme” circumstance.

this was a time when barons of the same duke, and dukes and earls of the same king, would privately war with one another, with the winner assuming the loser’s place in the feudal chain for the annexed fief.

 

[Kaninchen]

Ok, so it wouldn’t matter if those homes were take because in 500 years people would have forgotten about it? As a matter of justice it makes no difference.

Why is this particular point in time the one with the determining view of ‘justice’? Why is your particular concern, at one particular point in time more significant than any other?

At what point in recorded history should there be limits on mutual compensation? Should the families of Saxon lords be suing the descendants of the Normans, for example? Should the inhabitants of Latin America be suing the Spanish Church for its proportion of the wealth accumulated in the plundering of the Spanish colonies?

 

[ltwin]

It is a bit strange to me that as Supreme Governor the Queen has no real (name removed by moderator)ut or say in how the CoE is run or what direction it is taking.

No stranger than the Queen having virtually no authority over the UK government.

I mean what if the CoE took a direction (e.g. women bishops, lgbt acceptance etc.) that she may not tolerate herself?

As in civil matters, she wouldn’t express an opinion on that in public. Privately, she might offer her advice and opinion to important people, but she’d never interject herself into a situation that made the monarchy itself the issue.

In my opinion she strikes me as being a more traditional Anglican in that sense.

Yeah, as far as we know, she seems to be pretty conservative. However, as I’ve said before, it is General Synod–not the Queen–that governs the Church of England.