AHC makes the religion have a bigger role on the anglosphere.

A minor disclaimer: This is not valid for the United states or Ireland. On ireland for obvious reasons, and in the US because the USA has many strong christian denominations apart from the Anglican church, I'm not saying that the catholic church and the other non aglican protestant denominations (like the methodists and calvinists) are not important on the other members of the anglosphere, but for this scenario the main religious figure must be the anglican church.

The challenge is basically to keep the anglican church strong and present on the political scenario and every day life on the anglosphere, especially on the United Kingdom, the PoD is january 1st of 1900.
 
From wiki, Canada has only had 4/39 Anglican PM, with only one being both cradle and(presumbaly) devout.

Anglican (4 PMs, 8 mandates)

Sir John A. Macdonald (Conservative) (Raised Presbyterian, converted in 1875.)

Sir John Abbott (Conservative)

Sir Robert Borden[2] (Conservative) (Raised Presbyterian.)

Kim Campbell (Progressive Conservative) (Does not attend church and criticizes the treatment of women by organized religion. In 2004 she stated that religion "gets in the way of morality".)[3][4]
 
Sorry, I wrote another post about the UK and Canada, which put the stats above in some context. But it somehow got deleted.
 
What I said in the earlier post was that you probably need Anglicanism to gain a greater foothold in the colonies, and then for more Anglicans from those places to move to the UK post-decolonization, in order to counterbalance the usual secularization that takes place with modernization.

I also said that Orwell somewhere( maybe England Your England) writes that Anglicanism never really took hold among the middle and lower classes in the UK. Though he also mentions "old maids bicycling to Holy Communion in the morning mist" as representative of English culture.

On Canada, I said that the combined influence of French Quebec, along with migations from the Scotland, Ireland(to a lesser extent), and continental Europe and the USA, probably conspired to reduce the influence of Anglicanism in Canada.
 
And the first three PMs on my list served in an era when the Conservative Party considered itself the standard-bearer for British values in Canada.
 
It sure seems odd to equate Anglicanism with religion, as though all the others aren't.

If you exempt the USA and Ireland, the Anglosphere pretty much boils down to the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and parts of South Africa, and Canada. Canada is I suppose about as religious as the USA is, in much the same way--mostly Christian, just not particularly Anglican/Episcopalian. But lots of Catholics and loads of other Protestant denominations besides Anglican, with some Eastern Orthodox thrown in here and there, and a fair number of Jews and Muslims.

I don't suppose Australia or New Zealand differ radically from the USA in this respect either. Compared to the USA they might seem substantially less dominated by an ostentatious form of Christianity but I suppose about the same proportions of people actually go to services or otherwise take some form of devotion seriously.

So really, who in the developed world is more seriously 'religious' across the board than the Anglosphere, with or without including the USA?

Now implying that the only religion worth talking about is the Church of England strikes me as rather monstrously insensitive to say the least, so I have to suppose we have some weird translation issue going on here, something along the lines of having meant to say "Make the official state religion of Britain have a much larger portion of followers in the Anglosphere." That would also help explain why Ireland and the USA are exempt. Very well, to do so would probably require the government of the UK to have been more repressive on religious matters. After all, is the "Low Church," including the Congregationalist Puritans, Church of England or not? If you mean a broad spectrum of subdoctrines which are approved by the monarch and Archbishop of Canterbury, I am not sure how historical that is--whether Puritans were considered CoE or not I mean. Anyway that leaves the various dozens of other denominations, large among them the Wesleyists/Methodists, not to mention Baptists and Salvation Army and so forth all out in the cold. Not to mention Roman Catholics.

And what about the Church of Scotland, if there is such a thing? Is the Calvinist order there compatible with "Anglican" or not? (Is the British monarch deemed the head of the Scottish church as well as the English?) At the very least the UK must tolerate and support whatever religious order is dominant in Scotland as well as England, so the British Empire would have at least two denominations.

But I think that the British movement toward tolerance, at first of all Protestant denominations and eventually of Catholicism, and in the interstices non-Christian religions as well, was important to their being able to build a global empire in the first place. Maybe not utterly crucial but I think that if Britons did not adopt the notion that other people could have their own religions and it was not the duty of the British state to change their ways had a lot to do with the British being able to get their tentacles into places like India or China, and without that kind of leverage the wealth enabling them to conquer outright other territories would have been less, making for a slower and probably less comprehensive in area growth of Empire. The Anglosphere in other words would be smaller. Colonies would be less attractive places for non-British European immigrants to settle, and thus growth would be limited versus OTL. Conceivably without the policy of religious tolerance, British industry might have been slower to develop. But diversification of British piety away from the High Church of England and toward Dissenters of various kinds is the logical outcome of that, especially since the CoE was not geared to the concerns of the working class masses developing in the industrializing kingdom of OTL; there are reasons Anglicanism tends to be a middle and upper class thing whereas evangelical religions tend to flourish among the poor working classes. CoE might have had solid enough mass appeal in the traditional English countryside (though there too, I think actually Catholicism tended to hold on despite vigorous efforts to root it out as a criminal and treasonous conspiracy, so maybe even in its heyday CoE was more a gentry thing) but the Church would have had to change quite a lot to become the first choice of the industrial workers; there are reasons Wesleyians made a lot of converts there.

So basically a more monolithic CoE regime that aggressively minimized Dissenter factions and Catholicism alike would probably have so many trappings of "state religion" along the lines of Continental official faiths of various political bailiwicks that by the 20th century, instead of converting to more hard-line Christian denominations, the public would probably generally fall into religious apathy and outright atheism, more on Continental lines.
 
I'm not convinced NZ wasn't quite religious till recently. Certainly there are a load of churches and political leadership remained quite pious until 60-70s
 
And what about the Church of Scotland, if there is such a thing? Is the Calvinist order there compatible with "Anglican" or not? (Is the British monarch deemed the head of the Scottish church as well as the English?) At the very least the UK must tolerate and support whatever religious order is dominant in Scotland as well as England, so the British Empire would have at least two denominations.

Yes, there is a Church Of Scotland, and yes, it is Calvinist. But no, I don't think the British monarch is considered the head of the COS, but she is a member. I believe they attend the Presbyterian service when they are up at Balmoral.
 
That Orwell quote in question "Also, the common people are without definite religious belief, and have been so for centuries. The Anglican Church never had a real hold on them, it was simply a preserve of the landed gentry, and the Nonconformist sects only influenced minorities. And yet they have retained a deep tinge of Christian feeling, while almost forgetting the name of Christ."
 
South Africa possesses a strong religious bent. People like father trever Huddleston and archbishop tutu fighting aganist apartheid. Until the 1980’s the Dutch reformed church was the prop for the NAtionalist elite, and racial segregation.
 
Top