It is time to separate the civil function of the monarch which relates to all UK (and Commonwealth) citizens from any religious functions which are recognised only by some of them. To come clean, the Queen is not, never was and never will be a sacred figure for me or for people like me. I see no biblical or theological justification to support this, and indeed, have never seen any offered. The Queen is a civil power and as such worthy of respect and prayer, but not a religious one in any other sense than that as a devout and dutiful Christian (for which much thanks) she is a fellow-member of Christ’s church. Granted that some Anglicans may have difficulty recognising in Charles (or William?) a similarly sacred figure, the issues are actually much larger. A head of state needs to be a focus of unity. While an explicit denominational religious loyalty is integral to the monarchy as currently understood the religious dimensions of that role militate against the civil ones. The words of the coronation oath uttered by Elizabeth’s successor will need to be radically altered.
Of course, this is a problem that has long existed. While Supreme Governor of the Church of England, Elizabeth has not occupied such religious roles in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Nor has she done so even for the Anglican communion in Commonwealth countries which look to her as Head of the Commonwealth. The inclusion of the religious dimension in the coronation has constituted a kind of English imperialism. Even within England, historic Nonconformity has always expressly denied a religious function to the monarch, although consistently supportive of the civil aspects of monarchy. And in an increasingly religiously diverse and secular country, the religious dimensions of monarchy are not exactly relevant.All of this points to dividing up the roles played by the monarch to distinguish much more clearly between the civil role that may be recognised by all citizens (and which includes the protection of religious freedoms for all) and a religious one which is relevant to the Church of England which believes in it and approves it. This in turn points to two ceremonies: one in which Elizabeth’s successor assumes the civil role, with appropriate wording perhaps in Westminster Hall (interestingly, the scene of the trial of Charles I), and a second, perhaps in Westminster Cathedral where religious duties towards the Church of England are affirmed for as long as the Church wishes to maintain its sacred view of the monarchy.
Dr Nigel G. Wright
Dr Nigel G Wright is the Principal of Spurgeon’s College, London. He was also President of the Baptist Union of Great Britain from 2002 – 2003. Currently a Council Member of the Baptist Union & former Moderator of its Doctrine and Worship Committee, Council Member of the Baptist World Alliance & he has previously chaired its Study Commission on Christian Ethics from 2000-2005. Dr Wright is a Council Member of the Evangelical Alliance, and is a Board Member of Moscow Theological Seminary.
