The Coronation... Fidei Defensor … Defender of the Faith: really...?

Steven Hanna  |  Features
Date posted:  1 May 2023
Share Add       
The Coronation... Fidei Defensor … Defender of the Faith: really...?

The State Opening of Parliament in May 2022 | photo: Wikimedia

That phrase is quite possibly being hotly debated again as King Charles takes his Coronation oath. In fact, King Charles has signed up to it already and had it declared as one of his titles at his accession on the death of the late Queen.

Fidei Defensor is Latin for ‘Defender of the Faith’ and it is seen on all British coins in the abbreviated letters F.D. or FID. DEF. (I will leave others to do their own reading on the fate of the ‘Godless Florin’ of 1849 if your interest so inclines).

As many will know, King Charles had wanted to change his oath as Supreme Governor of the Church of England to ‘defender of faith’ more generically. This could then be understood as defender of faiths, plural – in the sense of being a defender/the defender of the right of all people to have a faith. This, of course, is different to making an oath to be defender of the content of a faith.

Nonetheless, many Christians were not impressed. I was one of them.

But the more I have thought about it, the more ridiculous I think it is.

After all, why should we expect a monarch, especially one who might widely be perceived to be an unbeliever, to take an oath to be defender of the Christian faith? It is a nonsense. Monarchs are chosen by line of succession, but the existence of genuine faith does not necessarily follow.

It is equally nonsense to require the monarch to be Supreme Governor of the Church of England, again especially if they are an unbeliever. And regardless of their own belief, is it, in any case, realistic, in these days of constitutional monarchy, to think that the monarch would or could really veto decisions made by General Synod? Indeed, a constitutional monarch is also unable to veto un-Christian laws that the government wishes to bring in – the introduction of gay marriage being an obvious example. To veto would cause a constitutional crisis and possibly jeopardise the future of the monarchy. Of course, some may say – bring it on, after all Biblical Esther also faced an existential crisis, yet she did indeed stand for ‘such a time as this’ and God honoured her faith and preserved her.

Henry VIII

However, it is obvious we are no longer in Biblical times nor in the days of dear old Henry VIII to whom the title of ‘Defender of the Faith’ was first given by Pope Leo X back in Oct 1521 – a title given to him, indeed, in recognition of Henry’s book supporting Roman Catholic doctrine, notably its doctrine of the seven sacraments. (Incidentally, there is no indication that Henry ever changed his Catholic beliefs – he just became an Anglo/English Catholic instead of a Roman Catholic!) Of course, subsequent to Henry renouncing the supremacy of the Pope and calling himself the head of the Church of England, Pope Paul III excommunicated Henry and that title was removed. It was only later, after the restoration of the monarchy, that Parliament re-instated the title, this time applying it to mean Defender of the Protestant Faith of the Church of England. One could well argue, it would have been better had Parliament let the title remain in abeyance.

Our monarchs today don’t have the same power that Henry did. Time has moved on – but we Brits do rather love tradition, don’t we? But doing so, and insisting that King Charles still makes this oath, actually makes a mockery of the oath. Indeed, why would any Christian insist on forcing anyone to make an oath it is widely believed they cannot keep!? We surely ought to be the very people saying, DON’T make an oath you cannot keep!

Perhaps the best we might pray for is that King Charles becomes a Christian and upholds the Christian faith personally and publicly in his Christmas Day message. However, to think that he might risk the future of the whole monarchy for the sake of the Christian faith is highly unlikely. Indeed, to expect King Charles or any subsequent constitutional monarch, Christian or otherwise, to be able to resist un-Christian laws from the government or veto changes to the Christian faith from the Church of England is highly unlikely.

However, the situation is worse than this. For, actually, the people to whom we ought to be looking to be defenders of the Christian faith (in its content) are those, who in their ordination vows, are required, quite properly, to defend the Christian faith:

All ordained ministers (including bishops) in the Church of England have affirmed and agreed to declare ‘the faith which is revealed in the Holy Scriptures and set forth in the catholic creeds and to which the historic formularies of the Church of England bear witness’.

Moreover, all ordinands have also, again quite properly, been required to declare an oath to uphold/promote/defend such faith, not merely just personally believe it:

Question: Do you believe the doctrine of the Christian faith as the Church of England has received it, and in your ministry will you expound and teach it?

Ordinands respond: I believe it and will so do.

So, we really ought to think more sensibly about whom we should/should not be making to swear this oath. Let us not require the monarch to swear such an oath, whoever they are, especially if we are Christian. Rather, let us hold to account those who have been properly required to make such an oath – namely, our church ministers and bishops. And let us also remember, the dire consequences on them who have and ought to be making this oath, namely that, if they continue to forsake this oath, as so many Church of England ministers and bishops and others in different denominations are now doing, publicly, privately and collegiately, then God has called them ‘wandering stars [unreliable guides] for whom the blackest darkness has been reserved forever’ (Jude 13).

But, finally, let us not let ourselves off the hook, but realise, also Biblically, that there is an even wider group of people to whom we should be looking to fulfil the role of defender of the faith – and that is … every genuine follower of our Lord Jesus. The Bible tells us that the church is the ‘pillar of truth’ (1 Tim. 3:15) – we are the defenders of the faith. In the very best sense of the word, we are truly Protestant when we protest and call out the wolves and false teachers. It is these counterfeit Christians and religious leaders who are ‘throw[ing] the truth to the ground’ today (Dan. 8:12).

Let us then … be the true defenders of the faith – let us model it in how we live, in what we proclaim and who we call out as counterfeits. May the Lord be pleased to bless His word and purify His church today. Amen.

 

Steven Hanna is the pastor of a small church in Exeter. He trained at Oak Hill and was a minister in the CofE for 18 years until he left in 2020.

Share
< Previous article| Features| Next article >
Read more articles on:   Royal Family
Read more articles by Steven Hanna >>
Reviews
Escaping spiritual abuse

Escaping spiritual abuse

There is no reason to doubt the good motives of the book: to help identify spiritual abuse, ‘to seek …

New here?

Register and get three free articles each month!

Register

Need to advertise?

We can help you reach Christians across the country

Find out more