Since when did freedom of Christian religion become freedom of religion?

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,228
4,189
37
US
✟909,909.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
1. The American Revolution was not about the tea tax.
2. Why shouldn't the people who felt oppressed in the 1770s just sit tight in the knowledge (?) that in 150 years-after all of them were long since dead-things would be better? LOL

I shouldn't have said that because it never had anything to do with the subject at hand. I'll probably delete it. But I can address it. Isn't that why the colonists wanted their freedom from King George III? So that they could be free from his apparently ridiculous tax on tea? That's why the Boston tea party started. I mean granted it wasn't JUST a tax on tea he apparently raised many taxes but the tax on tea is what drove the colonists to war. At least, that's what I was taught in school when we were talking about the American revolution. They also mentioned that some colonists wanted to stay loyal to the king because God pretty much commanded it (they didn't mention that part but that was probably why) and they were called Tories while the colonists that wanted freedom were called Patriots. I said that if they waited 150 years they would have gotten their freedom from the royal monarchy because most countries over the years that are ruled by the monarchy have mostly gotten their freedom from the monarchy.

Yes, England still technically "owns" them. But the royal monarchy doesn't really make all the laws and ordinances and governs the countries they own. They have prime ministers for that. Only in England did the monarchy have all of the power. And even in England the royal monarchy has lost some of it's power because the prime ministers make the laws now while Queen Elizabeth II gives the final approval. No longer does the King/Queen say "Kill this person." and is obeyed. They don't have the same power that they used to. It's a good thing in today's day in age when humanity has changed and see's that kind of power as wrong. But people who lived back then never questioned it. They obeyed the royal family without question because God told them to.

Why should they have waited? I don't know. They had no way of knowing that the Royal Monarchy would lose it's power that's one argument that's probably right. But still at the time and pretty much from the beginning of time people were supposed to be loyal to their king and to authority. So I see it as kind of wrong that they wanted to secede from the English king who really wasn't much of a tyrant in the first place. True, he was not well liked by even the English people and some of them tried to assassinate him because they wanted Catholicsm to be a main religion of the church again but the majority of England still remained loyal to their king so what would make a colonist any different? Virtually every country that Britain "Owns" has remained loyal to the British monarchy so what made the colonists any different? What made them special that they were able to go against what God and what their King wanted like that?

I could be uneducated and wrong though in any of these things. I'm open to being wrong. Especially by people more educated than I am. But to me, it just doesn't seem right.

*edit*

Oh yeah and another thing that confuses me about the Patriots. After the war was over and they got their independence from England they wanted to make George Washington their king! It's like... you just cost thousands of lives on both sides trying to break free from kings and queens yet you want to make Washington your king and start all over again? If Washington never saw the problem with this America would be another country with a royal family. Like... it boggles my mind that people who wanted to break free from a Monarchy and Authority would want to later make somebody else their king.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I shouldn't have said that because it never had anything to do with the subject at hand. I'll probably delete it. But I can address it. Isn't that why the colonists wanted their freedom from King George III?
No, no. It was one incident in a long series of developing grievances, albeit a colorful one.

They also mentioned that some colonists wanted to stay loyal to the king because God pretty much commanded it (they didn't mention that part but that was probably why) and they were called Tories while the colonists that wanted freedom were called Patriots.
There were many loyalists, despite all. That's true. After the war, some returned to England and others went to Canada; and the Anglican churches in the USA changed their names to the Protestant Episcopal Church because anything Anglo (meaning relating to England) was that unpopular.
 
Upvote 0

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
13,648
6,107
Massachusetts
✟583,317.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
England has been loyal to Christ and the doctrine of Christ since the beginning.
Included in Christ's love principles is that we do not covet what belongs to our neighbor. So, if I covet another people's land, this is not loving my neighbor as myself. To my knowledge, England has a history of destroying other people in order to take and use their lands, and the United States, also claiming to be Christian, has used murder and conquest to take lands of other people. I would say this is not how Jesus says to love; so I can not claim either country's individuals involved in such things have been loyal to how Jesus says to love. But there have been genuinely Christian people living in both countries.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

PloverWing

Episcopalian
May 5, 2012
4,338
5,024
New Jersey
✟332,494.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Neostarwcc, I wanted to focus on a couple of things you've said about Anglicanism and the Church of England. I'm a bit puzzled by what you're trying to say about the church.

You can freely be whatever religion you want to be now and live in England without fear of being put to death. But in order to be a member of the Church of England you have to convert to be Anglican Protestant. You cannot pick your own Christian religion.

The Church of England is Anglican Protestant. Joining the Church of England means becoming Anglican, by definition.

In the modern UK, people are free to pick their own Christian religion. People can be Presbyterian, Lutheran, Baptist, etc., if they want to (or can belong to a non-Christian religion if they want to).

The British monarch is in a unique position, because he/she has the role of nominally being the head of the Church of England. But ordinary citizens can choose which religion/denomination to belong to, or can be atheists.

Perhaps. I mean maybe in today's ever declining age an English person should be allowed to practice any religion they want. I mean, they can freely live in England without being Christian and don't have to fear being put to death now. So why not be able to join the Church of England?

People are free to join the Church of England if they want to.

You seem to be envisioning some barrier to joining the Church of England. What barrier do you have in mind?

I'd be massively interested to get an Anglican's opinion on the subject.

Paidiske, Albion, and I are all Anglican.
 
Upvote 0

Newtheran

Well-Known Member
Sep 10, 2018
783
571
South
✟26,789.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
. What its about is after Americans gained their freedom from England and started to form their own government our forefathers wanted to make part of the constitution freedom of Christian religion. Why was it later changed over the years to freedom of all religions? Which president started that?

To be quite blunt, the people who revolted against England and wrote the constitution never dreamed that their descendants would be incompetent enough to invite millions of Barbary Pirates to settle on the continent, much less not know which bathroom they should go to.

Most of what has gone wrong in American is the result of judicial fiat. Policies that would never have had a dream of passing at the ballot box became the law of the land because corrupt judges assumed dictatorial powers without being challenged.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,433
7,859
...
✟1,187,903.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Despite the imperfection of the origins of United States, and it's current imperfections, or problems, it has produced more evangelistic efforts and ways to reach others for Christ than any other country. Sure, there are a lot of other religions here and there even atheists, too. Sure, street preachers can be mistreated (depending on the city), but this is not all cities. But it is far safer to street preach here than other countries. A person can make a good living so as to spread the gospel and to help others to follow Christ. But what other country has produced more Christian outreach films, and tracts (like chick tracts), and Christian books and study Bibles, etc.? Sure, there is a lot of luke warm churches here, but within all of that, there are a few who are on fire for the Lord and who are genuine in seeking to love God and others (according to His Word). The positive stories we read about in the Christian news here in America will move your heart. Just the other day, I seen a bus that helps the homeless have dental care. We can see the good ways of God here in our country. Sure, maybe not everyone is perfectly in line with the truth, and God will judge them one day. But I see that even in the fault of how this country was formed, a lot of good still came out of it for the purposes of the Lord. In England, the church attendance is dying out. Not to say that churches is how you should worship God, but the point here is that there are many here in the US who do focus a lot on God. Praise the Lord for that. Sure, the US is not a Christian nation exactly. No nation today is. But the point here is that God is using the US to spread His Word in a great many ways. We should rejoice in that. Praise God for that, my friend.
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,109
19,004
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,107.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Perhaps. I mean maybe in today's ever declining age an English person should be allowed to practice any religion they want. I mean, they can freely live in England without being Christian and don't have to fear being put to death now. So why not be able to join the Church of England? I see the point you're trying to make. I don't see how it can preserve the purity of the church though. It would make English people be farther away from Christ wouldn't it? Can you explain?

I'm not sure whether you quite understand the implications of Establishment.

England has an Established church. This means that, in effect, the Church of England is a branch of the English government. It is - ultimately, if generally distantly - controlled by parliament. The people who sit in parliament these days are free to not be Anglican; indeed they might practice any faith or none.

Imagine for a moment that we have a member of the English parliament who is a practising Satanist. Do we want that person voting in the governance of the church? No? That's what Establishment can mean.

Disestablishment would mean the separation of church and state; it would mean the Church of England governing its own affairs, through its synods and bishops. It would also mean that the monarch would need to relinquish their role as supreme governor of the Church of England.

I look at it from the point of view of an Australian Anglican (which makes me part of the same global communion as the Church of England); the church is not Established here. That means that we aren't controlled by the parliament of Australia; and when I look at the parliament of Australia, I'm very very grateful for that fact! Our current prime minister is not Anglican; in recent memory we have had an atheist prime minister (whom I appreciated as prime minister, but who would have hardly been suitable to have input into church matters). Our synods are free to make decisions in line with the gospel and our mission, and our leaders are free to speak their minds on government policies and actions, with relatively little outside pressure. And that makes it easier for us, I think, to actually live out our faith.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PloverWing
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,228
4,189
37
US
✟909,909.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
No, no. It was one incident in a long series of developing grievances, albeit a colorful one.


There were many loyalists, despite all. That's true. After the war, some returned to England and others went to Canada; and the Anglican churches in the USA changed their names to the Protestant Episcopal Church because anything Anglo (meaning relating to England) was that unpopular.

Oh! Right they were called loyalists not Tories I remember now. Tories were the British army. Derp. Hey It's been a REALLY long time since I've been in school lol. lol I didn't know that they didn't cover that part in history class. They wanted to give the impression that a majority of the colonists wanted freedom since well... that's the way it is today. So my issue and problem was brought up in the 18th century then when a majority of the Colonists wanted to stay loyal to the King. I'm glad that they at least remained loyal to the King despite it all. Some of them moved to England? Cool did not know that.
 
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,228
4,189
37
US
✟909,909.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Included in Christ's love principles is that we do not covet what belongs to our neighbor. So, if I covet another people's land, this is not loving my neighbor as myself. To my knowledge, England has a history of destroying other people in order to take and use their lands, and the United States, also claiming to be Christian, has used murder and conquest to take lands of other people. I would say this is not how Jesus says to love; so I can not claim either country's individuals involved in such things has been loyal to how Jesus says to love. But there have been genuinely Christian people living in both countries.

True. But that's only because they wanted to spread their empire and to spread Christianity to the world.

Plus, many Christians have done many horrible things in our long history. Like when Blood Mary (I'll always want to call her that she wasn't a well liked Queen) wanted Catholicism to be brought back into the church of England she burned tens and tens of thousands of Protestants at the stake to do so. It didn't work and those protestants died for nothing just because they were protestant. But she was still obeyed without question despite how horrific it was.

But that's another example of something horrible that England did. Umm what about the war where Christians and Muslims fought each other (Forget what the war was called) and the Christians massacred a bunch of muslims just because they didn't share their faith?

Or when Hitler who was apparently a baptist killed all of those Jews? But that's kind of a bad example because afaik hitler was only Christian on paper.

There's been lots of meaningless bloodshed both among Christians and that Christians have done to other religions. That doesn't make them any less Christian. A Christian is a sinner who comes to Christ for salvation and accepts him as Lord and Savior. Remember Christ said that he will lose none.

If doing horrible things made us not Christian than my conversion would have been false as well.

England did many bad things over the course of it's existence. But so didn't the first hundred years or so of the United States. There Christians massacred a bunch of Indians just because they wanted their land despite the Indians saying "Welcome Enjoy our land. Land is free to everyone.".

Let's see what other nations were Christian and did a bunch of horrible things. I can't think of any right now. But there's a lot. Christians are faulty but that doesn't make them any less Christian.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'm not aware of anyone in the US that regrets our decision. We elect nearly all of our representatives democratically and (until recently) a majority have been satisfied with the results.

Yes, nearly all except for the president.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
True. But that's only because they wanted to spread their empire and to spread Christianity to the world.

Plus, many Christians have done many horrible things in our long history. Like when Blood Mary (I'll always want to call her that she wasn't a well liked Queen) wanted Catholicism to be brought back into the church of England she burned tens and tens of thousands of Protestants at the stake to do so. It didn't work and those protestants died for nothing just because they were protestant. But she was still obeyed without question despite how horrific it was.

But that's another example of something horrible that England did. Umm what about the war where Christians and Muslims fought each other (Forget what the war was called) and the Christians massacred a bunch of muslims just because they didn't share their faith?

Or when Hitler who was apparently a baptist killed all of those Jews? But that's kind of a bad example because afaik hitler was only Christian on paper.

There's been lots of meaningless bloodshed both among Christians and that Christians have done to other religions. That doesn't make them any less Christian. A Christian is a sinner who comes to Christ for salvation and accepts him as Lord and Savior. Remember Christ said that he will lose none.

If doing horrible things made us not Christian than my conversion would have been false as well.

England did many bad things over the course of it's existence. But so didn't the first hundred years or so of the United States. There Christians massacred a bunch of Indians just because they wanted their land despite the Indians saying "Welcome Enjoy our land. Land is free to everyone.".

Let's see what other nations were Christian and did a bunch of horrible things. I can't think of any right now. But there's a lot. Christians are faulty but that doesn't make them any less Christian.

I think that what you really need is an accurate history book.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: danielmears
Upvote 0

stevevw

inquisitive
Nov 4, 2013
12,567
945
Brisbane Qld Australia
✟243,725.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I disagree with Americans leaving the church of England betraying their King who only charged a little taxes on tea and tried to gain independence from England when if they had waited just 150 years or so they would have had their freedom from the royal monarchy without any bloodshed. I think its foolish But that isn't really 100% of what this topic is about. What its about is after Americans gained their freedom from England and started to form their own government our forefathers wanted to make part of the constitution freedom of Christian religion. Why was it later changed over the years to freedom of all religions? Which president started that? It gets worse though eventually even England is going to turn its back on God and have freedom of all religions as well. Its true. Prince Charles has vowed when he takes the English throne that he will make the church of England freedom of religion as well instead of preserving the protestant Anglican church which has existed since the 1500s. Despite the Royal monarchy having to take a vow to preserve Christian religion in England since well... The beginning. So even England an empire that has been purely comprised of Christians for over 1,500 + years now is turning away from God. Why?

Okay fine you can freely be whatever religion you want to be in England now and still not be considered a traitor to your country. But the Church of England? Really? Since when has the entire world turned its back on God? It's not right! I mean Charles still is a Christian and a member of the church of England you have to be to be a monarch in England but he wants freedom of religion in the church of England.

Sorry forgot the source. Source:

Church of England should be stripped from Prince Charles' coronation vows, report suggests
I think as time goes by the world is becoming more secular. The separation of church and state has led to secular governments ruling rather than monarchies or religion. Secular governments have to be independent from any specific belief due to supporting equal rights. This has seen equality among belief rather than allowing one belief to be in control. At the same time religion is seen as a dimension of human living like culture and ethnicity so it is just one of several influences as far as being human is concerned and holds no special place. In fact I would say that religious belief has even become less relevant compared to culture and ethnicity because it is being seen as something that causes conflict and irrational behavior. This has meant that religious belief is often demoted against other rights and this has led to it losing prominence in society. More and more people are moving away from religious belief and we are living in a time of secular materialism.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Occams Barber
Upvote 0

danielmears

Active Member
Supporter
Jan 30, 2018
266
156
Phelan
✟132,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I disagree with Americans leaving the church of England betraying their King who only charged a little taxes on tea and tried to gain independence from England when if they had waited just 150 years or so they would have had their freedom from the royal monarchy without any bloodshed. I think its foolish But that isn't really 100% of what this topic is about. What its about is after Americans gained their freedom from England and started to form their own government our forefathers wanted to make part of the constitution freedom of Christian religion. Why was it later changed over the years to freedom of all religions? Which president started that? It gets worse though eventually even England is going to turn its back on God and have freedom of all religions as well. Its true. Prince Charles has vowed when he takes the English throne that he will make the church of England freedom of religion as well instead of preserving the protestant Anglican church which has existed since the 1500s. Despite the Royal monarchy having to take a vow to preserve Christian religion in England since well... The beginning. So even England an empire that has been purely comprised of Christians for over 1,500 + years now is turning away from God. Why?

Okay fine you can freely be whatever religion you want to be in England now and still not be considered a traitor to your country. But the Church of England? Really? Since when has the entire world turned its back on God? It's not right! I mean Charles still is a Christian and a member of the church of England you have to be to be a monarch in England but he wants freedom of religion in the church of England.

Sorry forgot the source. Source:

Church of England should be stripped from Prince Charles' coronation vows, report suggests
As the descendant of a fighting Quaker who fought against the British in the Revolutionary War, I believe your history is more than a little off. The Brits were butchers soaking the colonists dry with their taxes because England was having a financial crisis. The Scots can tell you how kind they were. Plus add in thousands burned at the stake for heresy against the church during the reformation. It must have been pretty bad to make a Quaker pick up arms. At least now people can worship as they wish. I do pray for a revival around the world, a return to truly loving our fellow man and God!
 
Upvote 0

mindlight

See in the dark
Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
13,596
2,659
London, UK
✟816,690.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I disagree with Americans leaving the church of England betraying their King who only charged a little taxes on tea and tried to gain independence from England when if they had waited just 150 years or so they would have had their freedom from the royal monarchy without any bloodshed. I think its foolish But that isn't really 100% of what this topic is about. What its about is after Americans gained their freedom from England and started to form their own government our forefathers wanted to make part of the constitution freedom of Christian religion. Why was it later changed over the years to freedom of all religions? Which president started that? It gets worse though eventually even England is going to turn its back on God and have freedom of all religions as well. Its true. Prince Charles has vowed when he takes the English throne that he will make the church of England freedom of religion as well instead of preserving the protestant Anglican church which has existed since the 1500s. Despite the Royal monarchy having to take a vow to preserve Christian religion in England since well... The beginning. So even England an empire that has been purely comprised of Christians for over 1,500 + years now is turning away from God. Why?

Okay fine you can freely be whatever religion you want to be in England now and still not be considered a traitor to your country. But the Church of England? Really? Since when has the entire world turned its back on God? It's not right! I mean Charles still is a Christian and a member of the church of England you have to be to be a monarch in England but he wants freedom of religion in the church of England.

Sorry forgot the source. Source:

Church of England should be stripped from Prince Charles' coronation vows, report suggests

When the political elite are Christians then a separation of church and state makes no sense. When they are morally relativistic nihilists then it makes sense. The church is still there in England but with the loss of the elite cultural Christianity is dying.

The American revolution was a worldly thing at the time but seems to have been worked through by two people's who were Christians to produce a good result. Forgiveness and honesty and family ties making the difference with other bad revolutions like the French and Russian ones for instance. Also the British were blocking the expansion of America from coast to coast which was the best policy.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes, nearly all except for the president.
The election system is the same for all presidential candidates.

We have never used a pure democratic system of majority rule.
California has a system where a minority can get initiatives
onto the ballot for everyone to vote on and it is not ideal.
The public does not always vote rationally.

The Brexit Plan Failed Again: What Happened, and What's Next?

California electricity crisis - Wikipedia

Election model: Clinton will win easily | TheHill


 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ignatius the Kiwi

Dissident
Mar 2, 2013
7,024
3,749
✟287,802.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The monarchy should drop the veneer of not just it's religious authority and symbolism but a lot of things it no longer has, like real secular power to affect laws. While there is a symbolic majesty to the Queen, all she really does as Queen is rubber stamp everything parliament wants. It is a monarchy in name only, though i could forgive it if the modern monarchs actually refused to sign certain laws into affect. It would remind everyone what the monarchy is actually supposed to be. Disestablishment would be a logical next step given how secular England is and how they are determined to become not the home of the English people but a multicultural and multi-religious country for everyone.

With regards to freedom of religion I think it evolved out of freedom for the Christian religion slowly. People inferred that since Christians can tolerate and live with each other despite conflicting creeds why can't all religions do this? Western Europe as a whole then gave up enforcing Christianity through secular means and cultural pressure. Happened in France during the revolution and happened slowly and in stages everywhere else.

The point about the Church and the American revolution is interesting. As I understand it many of the USA founding fathers were not Anglican Churchmen but were Christians (of some sort or another), deists or outright heretics. That Americans willingly followed these leaders shows just how weak the Church of England was in the USA. Perhaps that's not surprising as I understand America to be mostly comprised of separatist Protestants during it's colonial stage. Is it any wonder the descendants of Puritans might resent the monarchy and seek to be free from it by force?

Also you're wrong to suggest England is only now turning away from God. It began turning away from God 100 years ago. Even C.S Lewis and Christians of that time saw it. The question will be how long till it gives it up completely? My guess is when Islam reaches ten percent of the population.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
The monarchy should drop the veneer of not just it's religious authority and symbolism but a lot of things it no longer has, like real secular power to affect laws. While there is a symbolic majesty to the Queen, all she really does as Queen is rubber stamp everything parliament wants. It is a monarchy in name only, though i could forgive it if the modern monarchs actually refused to sign certain laws into affect. It would remind everyone what the monarchy is actually supposed to be. Disestablishment would be a logical next step given how secular England is and how they are determined to become not the home of the English people but a multicultural and multi-religious country for everyone.

With regards to freedom of religion I think it evolved out of freedom for the Christian religion slowly. People inferred that since Christians can tolerate and live with each other despite conflicting creeds why can't all religions do this? Western Europe as a whole then gave up enforcing Christianity through secular means and cultural pressure. Happened in France during the revolution and happened slowly and in stages everywhere else.

The point about the Church and the American revolution is interesting. As I understand it many of the USA founding fathers were not Anglican Churchmen but were Christians (of some sort or another), deists or outright heretics. That Americans willingly followed these leaders shows just how weak the Church of England was in the USA. Perhaps that's not surprising as I understand America to be mostly comprised of separatist Protestants during it's colonial stage. Is it any wonder the descendants of Puritans might resent the monarchy and seek to be free from it by force?

Also you're wrong to suggest England is only now turning away from God. It began turning away from God 100 years ago. Even C.S Lewis and Christians of that time saw it. The question will be how long till it gives it up completely? My guess is when Islam reaches ten percent of the population.

Demographers have pointed out that at the time of the American Revolution most colonists were nominally Christian but less than 10% were "churched" meaning members of an actual congregation. Most attended church for just baptisms, marriages and funerals and maybe an occasional itinerant preacher tossed in.
 
Upvote 0

AlexDTX

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 13, 2015
4,191
2,818
✟328,934.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I disagree with Americans leaving the church of England betraying their King who only charged a little taxes on tea and tried to gain independence from England when if they had waited just 150 years or so they would have had their freedom from the royal monarchy without any bloodshed. I think its foolish But that isn't really 100% of what this topic is about. What its about is after Americans gained their freedom from England and started to form their own government our forefathers wanted to make part of the constitution freedom of Christian religion. Why was it later changed over the years to freedom of all religions? Which president started that? It gets worse though eventually even England is going to turn its back on God and have freedom of all religions as well. Its true. Prince Charles has vowed when he takes the English throne that he will make the church of England freedom of religion as well instead of preserving the protestant Anglican church which has existed since the 1500s. Despite the Royal monarchy having to take a vow to preserve Christian religion in England since well... The beginning. So even England an empire that has been purely comprised of Christians for over 1,500 + years now is turning away from God. Why?

Okay fine you can freely be whatever religion you want to be in England now and still not be considered a traitor to your country. But the Church of England? Really? Since when has the entire world turned its back on God? It's not right! I mean Charles still is a Christian and a member of the church of England you have to be to be a monarch in England but he wants freedom of religion in the church of England.

Sorry forgot the source. Source:

Church of England should be stripped from Prince Charles' coronation vows, report suggests
I am no Catholic, but the creation of the Church of England by Henry the VIII so he could he could divorce Catherine of Aragon is no reason to consider it a Christian organization. It was a personal and political move on Henry's part. I would also consider the monarch's authority over the Presbyterian Church of Scotland to be purely political since John Knox was a true believer in Christ.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums