Henry VIII and the Anglican Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stuckinavortex
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Picky_Picky said:
Bishop Nazir-Ali tends to be his own man.

Yes, the monarch takes Communion as part of the coronation.
Click to expand...
From what little I know of him, he seems to have his heart in the right place. He is a frequent visitor to Anglicans somewhat similar to myself (somewhat),in my general vicinity, and elsewhere.
 
Yeoman said:
While way, way, way outside of this time frame, it’s interesting to note that the importance of coronation by the Archbishop of Canterbury was starting to pop up prior to the reign of Alfred the Great, when England had kingdoms, rather than it being a kingdom. Indeed, I think the words used now may have arisen in part way back then.
Click to expand...
Or just after, perhaps. I’ve heard it said it contains echoes of the coronation of Athelstan, or perhaps of Edgar. I must investigate some day. Until then I will bear in mind that many ancient ceremonies date from the deepest mists of the last 19th Century (he said cynically).
 
Picky_Picky said:
Or just after, perhaps. I’ve heard it said it contains echoes of the coronation of Athelstan, or perhaps of Edgar. I must investigate some day. Until then I will bear in mind that many ancient ceremonies date from the deepest mists of the last 19th Century (he said cynically).
Click to expand...
Athelstan rings a bell, as I do think that he was the first or second (can’t recall) monarch to be coronated, and he was King of the English.

Of course, he’s also the one that received the really bad advice to go berserk in the Danelaw, and if his name is accurately translated, I believe it actually means Athelstan the Ill advised.
 
Yeoman said:
Given the last few entries here (and my apologies if it’s addressed above, which it may be) how strong do we feel the attachment of the current monarch, and her extended family, actually is to the Church of England.

I guess I probably ought to ask that same question about the royal families of Norway, Sweden and Denmark in regards to the Lutheran Church while I’m at it.
Click to expand...
I think Elizabeth’s attachment to the Church of England is sincere, educated, and profound. As to her extended family, I just don’t know. There must be a question, of course, in a multi-cultural society, and one in which religious faith is no longer as strong as it was, over the whole business of an established church. Charles is said to have raised with his advisers how the coronation service could be made more inclusive to other faiths (what’s he up to – we’ve let the Church of Scotland in!) In every age the monarch finds new problems in the rôle.
 
Picky_Picky said:
I think Elizabeth’s attachment to the Church of England is sincere, educated, and profound. As to her extended family, I just don’t know. There must be a question, of course, in a multi-cultural society, and one in which religious faith is no longer as strong as it was, over the whole business of an established church. Charles is said to have raised with his advisers how the coronation service could be made more inclusive to other faiths (what’s he up to – we’ve let the Church of Scotland in!) In every age the monarch finds new problems in the rôle.
Click to expand...
I should have added, of course, that there are several Catholics in the extended family.
 
Yeoman said:
Of course, he’s also the one that received the really bad advice to go berserk in the Danelaw, and if his name is accurately translated, I believe it actually means Athelstan the Ill advised.
Click to expand...
You’re thinking of Aethelred the Unready.
 
JimmyG88 said:
I think it’s interesting that there are schools of thought within Anglicanism that recognise two sacraments some that recognise seven and some that regard coronation as s sacrament. Which is an interesting thought if you do indeed see a monarch as chosen by God and a coronation as 'an outward sign of inward grace (perhaps in this case not ordained by Jesus Christ) by which grace is given to our souls
Click to expand...
interesting! I can understand how some might see a coronation as a
sacrament. I still remember the coronation of Elizabeth II.
 
Picky_Picky said:
I don’t know if Bishop Nazir-Ali counts, but I recall that he described the British (English?) coronation service as “sacramental throughout”. Throughout, but with specific emphasis on the anointing, I think. Would you say that “sacramental throughout” is quite different from “a sacrament”? (I ask because I don’t know).
Click to expand...
I think it is a bit different, yes. Things can be sacramental without being sacraments. Isn’t that why Catholics have a formal category of “sacramentals”?

I think that calling coronation a sacrament would be more common in the Eastern Church, but I may be wrong about that.

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
I think it is a bit different, yes. Things can be sacramental without being sacraments. Isn’t that why Catholics have a formal category of “sacramentals”?

I think that calling coronation a sacrament would be more common in the Eastern Church, but I may be wrong about that.

Edwin
Click to expand...
Yep. I follow.
 
Picky_Picky said:
Yep. I follow.
Click to expand...
I was taught that a sacrament is an outward sign of inward grace ordained by Jesus Christ by which grace is given to our souls. So I understand Jesus instituted baptism, holy communion, ordination, confirmation (Pentecost??) marriage, last rites and confession I can’t remember when he instituted them. I’m sure I knew once. But if the ‘institution’ part is not necessarily clear and if medieval people believed the monarch was chosen by God it’s not a huge stretch to seeing coronation as a sacrament. Although it’s not ever going to be open to the public (or maybe it should be)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top