Community Chat

[stuyvesant]

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

Well, the Defender of the Faith Title doesn' include Roman Catholics, Hindus, every sect of the Islamic faith, Buddhists, and most Protestant sects.  It's pretty exclusive to the CofE.

This is major cognitive dissonance. I like the woman.  I still think her position is out of date.

---

Of course it is, it's England from the 1500's.  It also wasn't meant originally to be for Protestants.

The reality is that no matter what the original says, there is freedom of religion in the UK, just like in America.

You are the one who said Charles wanted to change the wording to Defender of The Faiths, that's a good idea.

---

It's England from 2018.  Queen Elizabeth wasn't alive in the 1500's.  I think we're talking about Queen Elizabeth II?

[Noel7]

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

Well, the Defender of the Faith Title doesn' include Roman Catholics, Hindus, every sect of the Islamic faith, Buddhists, and most Protestant sects.  It's pretty exclusive to the CofE.

This is major cognitive dissonance. I like the woman.  I still think her position is out of date.

---

Of course it is, it's England from the 1500's.  It also wasn't meant originally to be for Protestants.

The reality is that no matter what the original says, there is freedom of religion in the UK, just like in America.

You are the one who said Charles wanted to change the wording to Defender of The Faiths, that's a good idea.

---

It's England from 2018.  Queen Elizabeth wasn't alive in the 1500's.  I think we're talking about Queen Elizabeth II?

---

No, I was talking about the issue of the Defender Of The Faith, Fidei Defensor, and when it came to be.  I was not the first to mention it, I simply added to when. I can pronounce it from my two years of learning Latin, but church Latin is not quite the same.

[Noel7]

@stuyvesant

My comment was in response to the first para.  BTW, Protestants are not sects, they are various denominations.

---

wrote:

Well, the Defender of the Faith Title doesn' include Roman Catholics, Hindus, every sect of the Islamic faith, Buddhists, and most Protestant sects.  It's pretty exclusive to the CofE.

This is major cognitive dissonance. I like the woman.  I still think her position is out of date.

---

[stuyvesant]

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

Well, the Defender of the Faith Title doesn' include Roman Catholics, Hindus, every sect of the Islamic faith, Buddhists, and most Protestant sects.  It's pretty exclusive to the CofE.

This is major cognitive dissonance. I like the woman.  I still think her position is out of date.

---

Of course it is, it's England from the 1500's.  It also wasn't meant originally to be for Protestants.

The reality is that no matter what the original says, there is freedom of religion in the UK, just like in America.

You are the one who said Charles wanted to change the wording to Defender of The Faiths, that's a good idea.

---

It's England from 2018.  Queen Elizabeth wasn't alive in the 1500's.  I think we're talking about Queen Elizabeth II?

---

No, I was talking about the issue of the Defender Of The Faith, Fidei Defensor, and when it came to be.  I was not the first to mention it, I simply added to when. I can pronounce it from my two years of learning Latin, but church Latin is not quite the same.

---

I'm sure your Latin is wonderful, even though you only had two years of  it.  I think Elizabeth had her coronation in the eary 1950's.  Held in Westminster Abbey, and presided over and sacredly consecrated by the highest prelates in the land.  She was proclaimed as, and acknowledged that she was chosen by God.

I think they may have a problem with their next coronation.  Because it's a God-designated thing, it may not be that easy because people might complain that they aren't CofE.  It's just a thought.

I got involved in this thread because I thought people were just refusing to acknowledge the sacred aspects of her being the monarch.  

[Noel7]

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

Well, the Defender of the Faith Title doesn' include Roman Catholics, Hindus, every sect of the Islamic faith, Buddhists, and most Protestant sects.  It's pretty exclusive to the CofE.

This is major cognitive dissonance. I like the woman.  I still think her position is out of date.

---

Of course it is, it's England from the 1500's.  It also wasn't meant originally to be for Protestants.

The reality is that no matter what the original says, there is freedom of religion in the UK, just like in America.

You are the one who said Charles wanted to change the wording to Defender of The Faiths, that's a good idea.

---

It's England from 2018.  Queen Elizabeth wasn't alive in the 1500's.  I think we're talking about Queen Elizabeth II?

---

No, I was talking about the issue of the Defender Of The Faith, Fidei Defensor, and when it came to be.  I was not the first to mention it, I simply added to when. I can pronounce it from my two years of learning Latin, but church Latin is not quite the same.

---

I'm sure your Latin is wonderful, even though you only had two years of  it.  I think Elizabeth had her coronation in the eary 1950's.  Held in Westminster Abbey, and presided over and sacredly consecrated by the highest prelates in the land.  She was proclaimed as, and acknowledged that she was chosen by God.

I think they may have a problem with their next coronation.  Because it's a God-designated thing, it may not be that easy because people might complain that they aren't CofE.  It's just a thought.

I got involved in this thread because I thought people were just refusing to acknowledge the sacred aspects of her being the monarch.  

---

I'm glad you brought it up, it is interesting.

[stuyvesant]

And by the way - instead of pretenting that the English Monarcy makes secular sense, how about acknowledging it makes no sense, and it's some strange thing they are stuck with and we are not.  It might make it easier to deal with all the other religion based cultures we know about.

[occasionalrain]

I don't see the British stuck with the Monarchy nor do I see anything to brag about that we aren't. It makes sense to me. It's an example of duty, tradition, gentility, charity.

[Noel7]

---

wrote:

And by the way - instead of pretenting that the English Monarcy makes secular sense, how about acknowledging it makes no sense, and it's some strange thing they are stuck with and we are not.  It might make it easier to deal with all the other religion based cultures we know about.

---

How about sticking with what was actually said, rather than something no one ever said or implied?

Who are you addressing that you claim is pretending the monarchy makes secular sense?  Who said that?  Source please. Or are you just musing?

[Noel7]

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

---

wrote:

Well, the Defender of the Faith Title doesn' include Roman Catholics, Hindus, every sect of the Islamic faith, Buddhists, and most Protestant sects.  It's pretty exclusive to the CofE.

This is major cognitive dissonance. I like the woman.  I still think her position is out of date.

---

Of course it is, it's England from the 1500's.  It also wasn't meant originally to be for Protestants.

The reality is that no matter what the original says, there is freedom of religion in the UK, just like in America.

You are the one who said Charles wanted to change the wording to Defender of The Faiths, that's a good idea.

---

It's England from 2018.  Queen Elizabeth wasn't alive in the 1500's.  I think we're talking about Queen Elizabeth II?

---

No, I was talking about the issue of the Defender Of The Faith, Fidei Defensor, and when it came to be.  I was not the first to mention it, I simply added to when. I can pronounce it from my two years of learning Latin, but church Latin is not quite the same.

---

I'm sure your Latin is wonderful, even though you only had two years of  it.  I think Elizabeth had her coronation in the eary 1950's.  Held in Westminster Abbey, and presided over and sacredly consecrated by the highest prelates in the land.  She was proclaimed as, and acknowledged that she was chosen by God.

I think they may have a problem with their next coronation.  Because it's a God-designated thing, it may not be that easy because people might complain that they aren't CofE.  It's just a thought.

I got involved in this thread because I thought people were just refusing to acknowledge the sacred aspects of her being the monarch.  

---

Only two years   Two years is standard unless you are majoring in it or hope to translate ancient texts.  It's certainly enough to translate Caesar's Gallic Wars from the Latin

[Noel7]

---

wrote:

I don't see the British stuck with the Monarchy nor do I see anything to brag about that we aren't. It makes sense to me. It's an example of duty, tradition, gentility, charity.

---

You are right.  Their polls show the majority of citizens want to keep the monarchy.