Q&A: Anglicanism and the Monarchy

Jeffrey Walton on September 8, 2022

News of the passing of Queen Elizabeth is only hours old, but I’ve already begun fielding questions regarding the British monarchy and its relationship with Anglican Christianity.

The late Queen was a practicing member of the Church of England. Her lively Christian faith was apparent in her public duties, private worship, and relationships with Christian ministers of various backgrounds (her friendship with the late evangelist Billy Graham was prominent enough to warrant an entire episode of Netflix’s “The Crown”).

One reader asks about the coronation service for a monarch, which for Elizabeth II took place in Westminster Abbey in June of 1953. Is it a “High Church” service?

This is a good question, since the Queen’s form of churchmanship is “Low Church”. Religion journalists sometimes conflate “Low Church” as “Evangelical” and “High Church” as “Anglo-Catholic” but those categories don’t completely overlap.

I think the root question here was “is the coronation service liturgically formal?” to which the answer is yes (BBC footage of the Queen’s coronation is viewable here). Elizabeth II’s coronation service was formal and ritualized (and assuredly her son’s coronation will be, too) but this isn’t a mass – the main Eucharistic liturgical service. The historic difference between High Church and Low Church isn’t formality. High Church worship, seen in a solemn high mass, centers upon sacramental ministry, while Low Church worship is centered upon proclamation of the Word of God. In short, you can have a Low Church service that is formal, but I wouldn’t place the coronation into either of these categories of churchmanship.

Another reader asks if King Charles is now the head of the Anglican Church in North America, or would be if the ACNA officially joined the institutional structures of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

The British Sovereign holds the title “Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England”. This does not extend to the Anglican Communion and the 41 other Anglican provinces (national churches) outside of the Church of England, which are functionally autonomous (although continue in relationship with one another).

The monarch’s titular role in the church involves formally appointing high-ranking members of the church on the advice of the UK prime minister (the Church of England is a state church, and senior bishops including the Archbishop of Canterbury sit in the House of Lords). The aforementioned coronation service will include the participation of Church of England clergy.

This responsibility is seen in the Archbishop of Canterbury’s questions asked of the Queen at her coronation:

“Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel?

“Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law?

“Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England?

And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?”

Additionally, the Archbishop (along with the Church of Scotland Moderator) presented the Bible to the Queen, with the words:

“Our gracious Queen:
to keep your Majesty ever mindful of the law and the Gospel of God
as the Rule for the whole life and government of Christian Princes,
we present you with this Book,
the most valuable thing that this world affords.”

And the Moderator continued: 

Here is Wisdom;
This is the royal Law;
These are the lively Oracles of God.”

Amazing language. I suggest that clergy place in their job descriptions that they “preach the lively Oracles of God.”

A reader asks if Queen Elizabeth II died a Presbyterian, as she was on Scottish soil at the time.

Yes. This is most visibly seen in Elizabeth II’s coffin first being moved to Edinburgh’s (Presbyterian) St. Giles’ Cathedral, rather than the cathedral of the (Anglican) Scottish Episcopal Church. While the (Anglican) Church of England is the state church in England, the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland is the state church in Scotland. The Sovereign technically becomes Presbyterian while in Scotland, in an ecclesial agreement that goes back to the Act of Union enacted in 1707 joining the Scottish and English parliaments into the Parliament of Great Britain.

Unlike in England where the Sovereign is the “Supreme Governor” of the church, the monarch is merely an ordinary member of the Church of Scotland, not the head of the church. For more information, see: https://www.royal.uk/queens-relationship-churches-england-and-scotland-and-other-faiths

Do you have questions about the church and the monarchy? Keep them coming in the comments below. Special thanks to my colleague and Professor of Church History Ryan Danker, whom I consulted in my answers.

  1. Comment by Chris Hutchinson on September 8, 2022 at 6:29 pm

    I’ve always wondered what would happen if in modern times, a King or Queen refused to appoint as bishop those who are recommended to him or her, because of heresy or the like. Is it always a rubber stamp by that point?

  2. Comment by Jeffrey Walton on September 15, 2022 at 11:35 am

    Hi Chris, former Bishop of London Richard Chartres sort of mentioned this in a recent column in The Spectator. He writes that the formal position continues to be that the monarch must be an Anglican and is responsible for appointing archbishops, bishops and deans on the advice of the prime minister. Gordon Brown, however, was unwilling to continue to be involved actively in the process. Nowadays, a synodical body, the Crown Nominations Commission, sends a single name to No. 10 for onward transmission to the Queen. See: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-queen-s-life-was-anchored-by-christianity

  3. Comment by Kathleen on September 8, 2022 at 7:17 pm

    I am a Presbyterian married to an Episcopalian. I was informed by my spouse that the British monarch is the head of the Church of England. I’ve read discussions among Presbyterians on social media saying that they understood Queen Elizabeth II to have died a Presbyterian, as she was on Scottish soil at the time. Could anyone provide clarification along with references, please?

  4. Comment by Jeffrey Walton on September 9, 2022 at 10:19 am

    Hello Kathleen,

    Yes, this is correct. While the Church of England is the state church in England, the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland is the state church in Scotland. The Sovereign technically becomes Presbyterian while in Scotland, in an ecclesial agreement that goes back to the year 1707. It sounds bizarre, but it’s true. However, unlike in England where the Sovereign is the “Supreme Governor” of the church, the monarch is merely an ordinary member of the Church of Scotland, not the head of the church. See: https://www.royal.uk/queens-relationship-churches-england-and-scotland-and-other-faiths

  5. Comment by John Kenyon on September 8, 2022 at 7:25 pm

    I think you miss that main point. Queen Elizabeth was Queen mother. A mother to her family and her people. I hope this sinks in to the Anglicans.

  6. Comment by Jeff on September 8, 2022 at 10:22 pm

    Jeffrey,
    Thanks for the interesting article and the information about Queen Elizabeth’s coronation. Yes, that is a beautiful and awesome passage that was written into the Bible she received.

    I confess I have difficulty believing Charles in the role of “Defender of the Faith” though…

    Blessings
    Jeff

  7. Comment by Loren J Golden on September 9, 2022 at 12:21 am

    As I recall, some years ago, Charles said that he would prefer the title of “Defender of Faith,” as opposed to, “Defender of the Faith.” I do not look to see King Charles III engaging in apologetics to defend the Christian faith from its detractors outside the pale of the Church—or from within either, for that matter.

  8. Comment by David on September 9, 2022 at 7:19 am

    The Church of England became “low church” under Cromwell. Even in the 1820s, the use of a cross was considered “rank popery” (Kenneth Clark, “The Gothic Revival”). It was the Oxford Movement of the mid-nineteenth century that brought back the elaborate ceremonials.

  9. Comment by Jay Haug on September 10, 2022 at 5:55 am

    The title “Queen Mother” refers to the mother of the monarch, not the King or Queen himself or herself.

  10. Comment by Daniel on September 28, 2022 at 1:13 pm

    It seems like there are lots of different definitions of “high church” or “low church” – it is about greater or lesser focus on preaching (or sacraments)? Is it about more or less elaborate “dressings” on the liturgy and ceremonial? Is it about more or less focus on the Articles of religion? Is it about greater or lesser embrace of Calvinism? Is it related to notions of the proper relationship of the church to the monarchy? Is it about candles on the altar-table (or whether you call it an altar or a table)? I’ve seen all of those put forward in different publications as possible understandings of “high” vs “low” church.

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.