Posted on 10/25/2006 11:26:14 PM PDT by Eurotwit
Prince Charles wants to be crowned King in a multi-faith coronation service in a dramatic break with tradition, it is claimed.
The Prince is said to have decided that the Christian service in Westminster Abbey must be followed by a separate ceremony involving religious leaders from other faiths.
Held in the ancient Westminster Hall inside the Palace of Westminster, the service would attempt to give room to Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Sikh beliefs as well as other Christian denominations.
Prince Charles believes reforms to the coronation are vital to reflect the changes in British society that have taken place since the Queen was crowned in 1953, according to a report in this week's Spectator magazine.
It also claims he has been appalled by the string of politicians "sounding off" about multiculturalism, in particular the wearing of the veil by Muslim women.
Clarence House refused to comment on the claims.
It has always declined to discuss Prince Charles's coronation plans while the Queen is alive.
However, a senior source told the Daily Mail that the accession plans had been reviewed last year, though he insisted this was "routine."
The prince, who will become Supreme Governor of the Church of England when he becomes king, has already said that he wants to be Defender of Faith - not Defender of the Faith - when he accedes to the throne.
He is close to Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, who has called for a multi-faith coronation.
That puts him at odds with Rowan Williams, his successor, and with most Anglican bishops, who oppose such a move.
The crowning of the sovereign has taken place for almost 1,000 years at Westminster Abbey. The new king or queen takes the coronation oath which includes a pledge to maintain the Church of England.
At her coronation in 1953, the Queen swore to uphold "the laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel, maintain the Protestant reformed religion established by law and maintain and reserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England."
The Spectator article quotes a courtier as saying the Queen recognises, however, that she has no say over her son's coronation service.
"Her Majesty has carried out her duties to the letter throughout her life and she knows that they extend to the very end of the final act," he says.
"She recognises, however, that she should not exert her influence one second beyond the conclusion of her funeral. The coronation is a matter solely for the PoW."
The report says Prince Charles is keen that his coronation should "bear his imprimatur" and that it should be seen to mark the beginning of a new era and a new kind of reign.
Although his mother permitted television cameras from the BBC into Westminster Abbey to transmit live pictures of her coronation, they were required to withdraw at certain points in the ceremony which she felt to be too sacred.
But Prince Charles is said to believe that such deference is now inappropriate.
He also wants the service truncated into a "less unwieldy' and more 'focused and telecentric" event, according to the report.
He also believes it should acknowledge the religious diversity of the country that he will be ruling.
The report says that following the formal Christian ceremony in the Abbey, the Prince wants here should be a separate interdenominational ceremony in Westminster Hall to reflect his desire to represent the peoples of all religions.
The separate gathering would be unlikely to take place immediately after the formal Christian coronation, but at a later date.
While Labour politicians have attacked the failings of multiculturalism in recent months, the idea of a separate coronation service to meet the requirements of other faiths has recently been mooted by the Evangelical Alliance, which represents a million evangelical Christians in the UK.
"It is no secret that the PoW has long felt passionately about this matter," the courtier added.
"His determination not to yield so much as an inch of this ground has been strengthened a hundredfold by the events of recent weeks."
"It has dismayed him to see the people who will one day be his subjects turn upon each other on the basis of their religious convictions." "As sovereign, he will wish to demonstrate that he is apart from the politicians who have been sounding off so much lately on, among other things, the issue of veils and that he can set an example for the entire country to follow."
LOLOL! It is a pretty bad nickname. :)
Is this because he father was Greek Orthodox?
Or
Is this because he is a kook?
What happened to that whole "defender of the faith" thing? Did he skip that class in king school?
The Queen Mum died a few years ago. That is not the current Queen's title, or even nickname.
If that turns out to be the name he chooses.... just because his given name is William, it doesn't mean he has to be King William.
Uhhh.... I think some of the pages stuck together in your English history book. You've mentioned two people who were barely alive within a century of each other. If you think Charles I was "Bonnie Prince Charlie"....well, he wasn't.
Oh, good. I should have read ahead in the posts. :)
I meant - the Queen, who is his Mum.
Don't tell that to my husband, who was 35 when we got married (yes, first marriage.) He's not the least bit selfish.
Bzzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong answer. I married my husband when he was just over 36. Our marriage has now lasted for over 20 years.
Tell us how you REALLY feel! ;-)
At least Greek Orthodox is similar in format to the Catholic mass, as is the Church of England. That's not really so far-fetched. At least it's Christian. Arab/Islam, Buddhist, blah, blah, blah..... Charles has really jumped off the deep end on this one.
When you look at Charles, don't you think, "Someone in the Royal Family knew someone in the Royal Family?"
His parents are both second cousins (through the Danish line) and third cousins (through the English line) to each other.
33 is late to start a successful marriage. There can be exceptions. However, Charles and Di was typical of such marriages.
...and hopefully most Americans would have the good manners to mind their own business. :O)
Sorry, but this statement makes no sense. My father was in his late forties when he married my mother. They were happily married for 42 years.
Chuck, I'd rather see Wills succeed your mom than you, but that's not necessarily going to happen either.
The Queen Mother is a title given to one who was married to the King and is both His widow and the mother of the current Monarch. Calling Elizabeth II the Queen Mum is as dumb as what Charles wants to do.
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.