Heterosexual marriage splits church

Charles and Camilla wedding splits church
By Ben Leapman, Evening Standard
15 February 2005
Complete story

A split has emerged in the Church of England over the marriage of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles.

Click to expand...

Opposition to the royal wedding centres on evangelical clerics who say the Church should not condone the marriage of a divorced man to his former mistress.

Click to expand...

Constitutional experts have warned it would be unlawful under the Royal Marriages Act for Charles to be married in a civil ceremony. On inheriting the throne, he would become Defender of the Faith and governor of the established Church.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has agreed to bless the couple after their civil ceremony on 8 April

Click to expand...

.

The same Chuch that was founded because Henry 8th chose to'change the rules' to suit himself????:sarcastic

The same Chuch that was founded because Henry 8th chose to'change the rules' to suit himself????

Click to expand...

While that is certainly true, I don't think they should be judged by that. If the church has progressed past that, then good for it. No point in holding a church accountable to what Henry the VIII did hundreds of years ago.

Personally I'm proud that the Anglicans are willing to stand up against it. I'm not an Anglican, but I can see a lot of sense in what they're doing. Why should they change the rules for a prince? Just give the throne to the next in line... William, isn't it???

This is another example of people straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Christianity is NOT a system of rules and regulations, it is a life lived in relationship with God.

Kiwimac

Christianity is NOT a system of rules and regulations, it is a life lived in relationship with God.

Click to expand...

Well, that ceratinly avoids the issue.

Ok, so would Christ want somebody that is not living in a correct relationship with Him, to be the head of his church???

The King, or Queen, of England is the head of the Anglican Church. It's mostly symbolic, but that in itself is important enough.

This is another example of people straining at gnats and swallowing camels.

Click to expand...

Well, that depends.

This obviously isn't going to affect a persons salvation in anyway. Hitler could have been the King of England without affecting anybody's salvation. But we're not talking about that. We're talking about the symbolism here. Wouldn't you be upset if your church decided to have an effigy of Hitler on a cross, in Christ-like fashion???

On one level it isn't important, but that's not the angle we're discussing here.

If it means so much to the Church and he really loves her then he'll avoid the whole constitutional crisis thing and remove himself from his place in the queue. His great uncle didn't seem to have a problem abdicating for love.
Having said that, it shouldn't be this big a thing...if people didn't interfere then they probably would have gotten married 30 odd years ago.

I have nothing against different-gender marriages. Either.