The Coronation of Christian King Charles III

[Hermit Philosopher]

I think it's a bit disingenuous to ignore the baggage and history of monarchy, but if we want to only look at the official role of the monarch, then we need to recognize that the monarch's official role is head of state of fifteen different countries without - officially, at least - no preference or favouritism between them.

In practice, there's a ridiculous conflict of interest here. As a Canadian, I can recall several stories of the Queen promoting British industries to the detriment of those industries in Canada and other Commonwealth Realms.

Personally, I think the job of promoting a nation would be much better suited to someone whose loyalties are to that one nation above all others.

What, like the Americans’ “America first”?
I mean, as they say: “that’s your opinion”.

Mine is simply another.

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[Debater Slayer]

What are you thoughts on the Coronation?

From the perspective of someone from a former British colony, I view it as possibly the best era of the monarchy. Charles has expressed notably conscientious positions on the environment and past slavery, for example. His coronation seems to me potentially the start of an era in which the monarchy may finally no longer explicitly or implicitly endorse or stand for the more troublesome and blood-stained parts of the British Empire's history.

I always viewed Elizabeth II as dubious at best, although she was still better than a lot of her predecessors. I think Charles will most likely be an improvement, and I wish him the best with his role.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What, like the Americans’ “America first”?
I mean, as they say: “that’s your opinion”.

Mine is simply another.

Humbly,
Hermit

Of course your opinion is different; you benefit from the unfairness.

And no, not like "America first;" just loyalty to the country one supposedly represents.

A story from Canada's ambassador to Germany in the early 90s:

The royal family themselves are under no illusion about who they are – British; where they live – Britain; and what they represent – the United Kingdom. When I was posted to Bonn in the nineties, Queen Elizabeth paid an official visit to Berlin largely to promote British industry. Ambassadors from Commonwealth countries were convened to Berlin, at their countries’ expense, to greet the Queen (in reality a photo-op). Because there were Canadian firms in Germany that could have used some high-level support, and because my credentials said that it was in her name and on her behalf that I was accredited as the Ambassador of Canada to Germany, I decided to test what the Monarchists’ assertions – that she is our Queen, too – meant in practice.

Not much, as it turned out. I asked an aide at the photo-op whether while promoting UK business her majesty might put in a good word for Canadian business too. It was evident from his reaction that such an idea was as unwelcome as it was novel.

The monarchy hurts Canada’s standing in the world. It’s time to let go

"Fealty to the British monarchy is an anachronism and a drag on Canadian foreign policy that confuses many and delivers little. It is time to turn the page on Buckingham Palace," writes CIGI Distinguished Fellow Paul Heinbecker.

www.cigionline.org

People don't bat an eye at the monarch's favouritism because of the history of colonialism: of course the "colonies" are going to be secondary to the "metropole." A necessary part of ignoring the monarchy's colonialist baggage as you suggest is recognizing the equality of all commonwealth realms as nations, but this will mean also grappling with the fact that they aren't treated equally, and the monarchy does a disservice to all but one of them.

 

[Callisto]

After the Coronation the Monarch is elevated from being a Mere Mortal to Elohim's/God's Spiritual and Temporal Representative.


The Coronation Liturgy

"...As was the case in 1953, this ceremony will not be visible to those watching on television (or online, nor indeed for those people in the Abbey) due to the presence of a newly-commissioned screen that will be held around the Coronation Chair. It is The King’s only moment of privacy during the Service, as he contemplates how he is called by God. Canopies such as these can be traced back to the Old Testament. In the Middle Ages it was custom for Sovereigns to travel beneath such a canopy. In this context, it is to signify the presence of God over this covenant of anointing. In this Coronation it also symbolizes the embrace, enveloping power, and presence of God during this moment...."

The Coronation Liturgy: ‘Called to Serve’ | The Church of England

The coronation liturgy for HM King Charles III with commentary, commissioned and authorised by The Most Reverend & Right Honourable Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury.

www.churchofengland.org

So , God shows up allegedly but the faithful aren't allowed to witness, once just expected to go by what others claim happens in a man-made ritual. Ok.

Unless this renders him impervious to mistakes, old age, morbidity, and mortality, he'll remain a very flawed (as we all are) mere mortal regardless of the pomp... Evidenced by his long line of predecessors who remained so as well.

 

[2ndpillar]

From the perspective of someone from a former British colony, I view it as possibly the best era of the monarchy. Charles has expressed notably conscientious positions on the environment and past slavery, for example. His coronation seems to me potentially the start of an era in which the monarchy may finally no longer explicitly or implicitly endorse or stand for the more troublesome and blood-stained parts of the British Empire's history.

I am sure that all of the Marxist Progressives will be happy with the possible era of another Progressive. But on the other hand, it might just be a set up for "Har-Magedon" (Rev 13-16).

13And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast anorldd out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs; 14for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty. 15(“Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and men will not see his shame.”) 16And they gathered them together to the place which in Hebrew is called Har-Magedon.

 

[exchemist]

Some people like to play this silly game where they pretend Charles could just start ruling like Henry VIII if he wanted to, so the people don't really have any power and are dependent on the benevolence of the Royal family for their rights.

Yeah I smelt coat-trailing. I haven't the patience.

 

[DNB]

Yes. However on one point, the explicitly religious role of the monarch - as Supreme Governor of the C of E - is a relic of the Reformation rather than being Medieval, surely?

Yes, you are absolutely correct - C of E was formed in the 16th century under Henry VIII.
Thank you for the correction, ...I haven't a clue what the heck that I was thinking when I said medieval???

 

[Elihoenai]

I think even in Solomon's case it was and is a compromise with the ideal which is governance by perfect laws seared into minds. Today's monarchs face great scrutiny for additional reasons, but overall Charles and Solomon have similar coronations.

If he exercises his powers they will become stronger, as long as he doesn't overdo it.

As an Anglican he should inquire about what course of action will strengthen moral courage and urgency in all of his citizens and not only baptized persons. Perhaps he also has some duties to the baptized, but he is supposed to help all

Joshua 1:8-9

8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

9 Have not I commanded thee? Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee whithersoever thou goest.


Do you Believe that during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II the Moral Courage of her Subjects was Strengthened? Is Britain and its Commonwealth of Nations Moral? Don't you believe that Evil increased under the reign of the previous Monarch?


Be strong and of good courage

 

[Elihoenai]

Being Supreme Governor of the Church of England seems a bit of an anachronism now. I think the C of E should probably be disestablished, now that the Reformation is so far behind us. But as it happens I think Chaz is a Christian of sorts.

As for the ritual, I think it's a good thing to do. The role of tradition and ritual is rather underappreciated and often misunderstood in modern times, I think. It's an occasion, an excuse for a bit of national celebration, a bit of national pride, not in an unhealthy way, a reminder of British history and identity and makes a welcome change from the ghastliness and venality of our politics.

While I think the cost of the royal family in its present form is too much to justify, I am on balance a monarchist. One look at the elected presidents around the world is enough to convince me that a presidential system would be no better - and could easily be worse. Chaz I gather wants to slim it down and make it more inclusive, and I'd like to give him the chance to try that out.

Charles I think is a decent bloke, his poor marriage notwithstanding, - and has actually been about 30 years ahead of his time when it comes to his crusades for protecting the environment and respecting nature. So I'm willing to let him be king and see what he can make of it.

(Zadok the Priest is great fun to sing by the way. The 1st bass part is splendid.)

Yes, the Role of Tradition and Ritual is Critical, as this Maintains the Nation. When you Lose Tradition and Ritual you Lose the Nation.

 

[exchemist]

Joshua 1:8-9

8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

9 Have not I commanded thee? Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee whithersoever thou goest.


Do you Believe that during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II the Moral Courage of her Subjects was Strengthened? Is Britain and its Commonwealth of Nations Moral?


Be strong and of good courage

This is all rather ridiculous. Nobody today, least of all the King himself, thinks he has any special God-given powers any more.

The best that can be said for Elizabeth's reign is that, during it, Britain found a way to become a lot more meritocratic, to free its colonies and to become a great deal more accepting of a wider variety of cultures and personal practices. Not much of this was her doing, if course, since the role of the monarch is ceremonial. However she played a role in these processes and did not obstruct them. And that's about it. Charles will be in the same position.

 

[Estro Felino]

This is all rather ridiculous. Nobody today, least of all the King himself, thinks he has any special God-given powers any more.

The best that can be said for Elizabeth's reign is that, during it, Britain found a way to become a lot more meritocratic, to free its colonies and to become a great deal more accepting of a wider variety of cultures and personal practices. Not much of this was her doing, if course, since the role of the monarch is ceremonial. However she played a role in these processes and did not obstruct them. And that's about it. Charles will be in the same position.

I think we need to acknowledge that King Charles III will represent the modern, the passage from the Empire mentality to a modernized monarchy.

 

[Elihoenai]

The reign of David & Solomon were still a theocracy, in that the Israeli constitution was based solely on God's decrees and the prophecies of Samuel, Ahithophel and Nathan. Under the Jewish kings men were punished who transgressed God's laws, the priests performed their daily rituals and sacrifices according to the Levitical law, men ate kosher and obeyed the sabbath.

King Charles does not rule an empire that, by constitutional obligation, reveres God nor obeys His precepts - no one is condemned for blaspheming God, nor are they ostracized or stigmatized for professing atheism or any other pagan religion. Christianity, in regard to the British monarchy, is just a vestige of the 16th century and bears very little significance as far as the faith of the populace is concerned, or the devotion and reverence of the king or queen themselves - they do not evangelize, nor probably can they even quote Scripture astutely.

Matthew 7:13

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:


Yes, in the British Empire there is No Reverence to Obey Elohim/God and his Laws. To the contrary. in the British Empire people are in a Total War Against Elohim/God. That's because the British Crown is Public Earthly/Temporal Christianity for the Many while Spiritual Christianity is practised by the Few hundred/thousand Elect in private.


It appears that Queen Elizabeth II strived for and entered the Strait Gate in private while making Outward/Public show of Earthly/Temporal Christianity for the British Crown.


The Christmas Broadcast, 1957

 

[Elihoenai]

Don't be silly. There are no "royal worshippers".

Romans 1:21-23

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.


You are being stupid and ignorant presuming to speak for everybody. When people reject the True Elohim/God they Worship False God Idol as a Replacement. The Worship of False God Idol could be the Royal Family, a Celebrity, the Pope, Priest/Pastor, carved image of Yeshua/Jesus, a Race, a stone, a tree, the Sun, the Moon, a partner, an animal, themselves etc.


THE INVESTITURE OF PRINCE CHARLES - 1969

Worship of the royal family represents much of what's bad about Britain

"...The royal family, and worship of the royal family — because that is truly how this fandom should be described — is part and parcel, if not at the root, of much of what is bad about British society. The United Kingdom is a beautiful and diverse and funny country, filled with a wide array of intelligent, interesting and kind people. But it also can be a bitter, small-minded place that is limited by unyielding and antiquated ideas about class and social mobility. And why wouldn't it be, when everyone's social worth can technically be calculated by their proximity to a family whose influence was originally granted by God (with the help of a few inter-family executions and overthrowings)...."

Worship of the royal family represents much of what's bad about Britain

This global celebration of the marriage of two wealthy people does not happen free of context.

www.euronews.com

 

[exchemist]

Romans 1:21-23

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.


You are being stupid and ignorant presuming to speak for everybody. When people reject the True Elohim/God they Worship False God Idol as a Replacement. The Worship of False God Idol could be the Royal Family, a Celebrity, the Pope, Priest/Pastor, carved image of Yeshua/Jesus, a Race, a stone, a tree, the Sun, the Moon, a partner, an animal, themselves etc.


THE INVESTITURE OF PRINCE CHARLES - 1969

Worship of the royal family represents much of what's bad about Britain

"...The royal family, and worship of the royal family — because that is truly how this fandom should be described — is part and parcel, if not at the root, of much of what is bad about British society. The United Kingdom is a beautiful and diverse and funny country, filled with a wide array of intelligent, interesting and kind people. But it also can be a bitter, small-minded place that is limited by unyielding and antiquated ideas about class and social mobility. And why wouldn't it be, when everyone's social worth can technically be calculated by their proximity to a family whose influence was originally granted by God (with the help of a few inter-family executions and overthrowings)...."

Worship of the royal family represents much of what's bad about Britain

This global celebration of the marriage of two wealthy people does not happen free of context.

www.euronews.com

This is utterly mad. You should be parading up and down Oxford Street with a sandwich board.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Do you Believe that during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II the Moral Courage of her Subjects was Strengthened? Is Britain and its Commonwealth of Nations Moral? Don't you believe that Evil increased under the reign of the previous Monarch?

I don't want to comment on this other subject. What Queen Elizabeth II does for her country and the commonwealth of nations, mostly, is help maintain diplomatic channels. She endlessly visits, receives, entertains, dresses up and chats and makes phone calls and takes part in marches. All of these things benefit her country diplomatically. I do not think she controls whether there is or is not evil or that she is truly in charge of the country. She has great teeth and puts them to diplomatic use.

I was answering your OP about Charles. He does have some opportunities to encourage morality, because he's in a public position. That's all.

I believe the 'Narrow gate' that Jesus refers to is a reference to humility. This makes the most sense of its location in Matthew chapter 7. Similarly, the foundation of rock referred to in that same chapter is referring to many things including non-judgement of others and humility. I do not think that a monarch of any kind is well suited to these as their position is itself a compromise with the ideal, however they can be humble and non-judgmental. I don't think, either, that a ceremonial monarch is a bad thing. Much worse to me are the personality problems that we face when people try to judge one another and cut each other off or act like we are superior. We are born smug, many of us. We can be smug and humiliated at the same time. Its amazing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yeah I smelt coat-trailing. I haven't the patience.

Not even the patience to properly read what I wrote, apparently.

I was talking about symbolism and you misunderstood it to be about the law.

 

[Elihoenai]

So , God shows up allegedly but the faithful aren't allowed to witness, once just expected to go by what others claim happens in a man-made ritual. Ok.

Unless this renders him impervious to mistakes, old age, morbidity, and mortality, he'll remain a very flawed (as we all are) mere mortal regardless of the pomp... Evidenced by his long line of predecessors who remained so as well.

Daniel 2:21

21 And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:


All Kings/Queens, Popes and Rulers are Ordained by Elohim/God and Installed by Elohim/God. Yes, Divine Right is a Reality because those Queens/Kings that sit on throne have been given the Right to do so by Elohim/God. Elohim/God also removes Kings/Queens


Yes, after the Coronation the King will still not be Infallible, will get old, get sick and die as evidenced by the previous Monarchs that sat on the throne. These are precisely the reasons why My Homage and Allegiance is to Elohim/God Only. This is the Reason why I'm Not Trusted by Pope, King, Ruler and Priest/Pastor. The Popes claim Infallibility and I Totally Reject this Claim. This is the Reason why, Happy to say, I Am Enemy of the State: Is Jesus Christ Enemy of the State?

Being an Ultra Extremist Celibate and Non-Violent Christian Gnostic, Homage and Allegiance Belongs to Elohim/God Only. You may think differently and join in one of the new aspects of the Coronation, The Homage of the People:


The Coronation Liturgy

The Homage of The People

Archbishop of Canterbury:
I call upon all persons of goodwill in
The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
and of the other Realms and the Territories
to make their homage, in heart and voice,
to their undoubted King, defender of all.

***

All who so desire, in the Abbey,
and elsewhere, say together:

All:
I swear that I will pay true allegiance to Your Majesty,
and to your heirs and successors according to law.
So help me God.

***

A fanfare is played.

***

Archbishop of Canterbury:
God save The King.

All:
God save King Charles.
Long live King Charles.
May The King live for ever.

In previous Coronations, the Homage has been the prerogative of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Heir to the Throne, followed by the Royal Dukes, and then the hereditary peerage in order of degree. The homage of peers alone has been replaced by the Homage of the People. The Archbishop will invite those who wish, from the United Kingdom and the other Realms both within the Abbey, and those watching and listening at home, to make their homage by sharing in the same words - a chorus of millions of voices enabled for the first time in history to participate in this solemn and joyful moment.

This is a new and significant moment in the tradition of the Coronation. Never before in our history have the general public been offered such an opportunity to join with national figures in declaring their allegiance to a new Sovereign.

The Coronation Liturgy: ‘Called to Serve’ | The Church of England

The coronation liturgy for HM King Charles III with commentary, commissioned and authorised by The Most Reverend & Right Honourable Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury.

www.churchofengland.org

Will you be participating in The Homage of the People? What are your thoughts on this?​

 

[Callisto]

Will you be participating in The Homage of the People? What are your thoughts on this?

No, I shan't be participating. I don't offer any fealty to any monarchy or a church, my Gods are the old gods than either one so, I'm good.

 

[2ndpillar]

Do you Believe that during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II the Moral Courage of her Subjects was Strengthened? Is Britain and its Commonwealth of Nations Moral? Don't you believe that Evil increased under the reign of the previous Monarch?

The rotting of the fruit increased in the recent past in spite of whatever the queen has tried to do. Now that they have a truly woke monarch, I will assume the path to hell will be paved with cut stone.

 

[DNB]

Matthew 7:13

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:


Yes, in the British Empire there is No Reverence to Obey Elohim/God and his Laws. To the contrary. in the British Empire people are in a Total War Against Elohim/God. That's because the British Crown is Public Earthly/Temporal Christianity for the Many while Spiritual Christianity is practised by the Few hundred/thousand Elect in private.


It appears that Queen Elizabeth II strived for and entered the Strait Gate in private while making Outward/Public show of Earthly/Temporal Christianity for the British Crown.


The Christmas Broadcast, 1957

Individually, you may have a pious and devout leader of a nation. Charlemagne, despite being a warrior, showed sincere concern for salvation and reverence to God, and the same with Louis IX. But, yes, as far as the nation is concerned and it's constitution and laws, they remained predominantly a secularized political entity. Although, I believe that Charlemagne, or Elizabeth I may have been saved themselves.