Posted on 11/16/2006 6:07:11 PM PST by sionnsar
Rowan Williams does something he's not used to doing. My gracious lord of Canterbury puts his foot down.
Prince Charles hopes of a multi-faith coronation suffered a blow when the Church of England asserted the historic importance of a solely Christian service when he becomes King.
In a rebuke to the Princes hopes of inviting Muslims, Hindus and others to take an equal role in Westminster Abbey, the Church declared that Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams will design the coronation service.
The highly unusual statement was the Churchs first official pronouncement on how the coronation will be handled and it comes amid intensifying controversy over the role of non-Christian faiths and non-Anglican Christian denominations.Dr Williams, however, has insisted that the Prince must restrain his interest in other faiths and stay within the constitutional framework that makes him Supreme Governor of the Church of England.
The intervention from the Church made plain that Charles will be on his own if he tries to introduce other faiths into the religious coronation service at the Abbey.
Thanks to Jim.
I nominate Charley for Upper Class Twit of the Year.
Why just for 'the Year'? Why not for the decade or the century?
The title 'Defender of the Faith' was awarded to the Tudor king, Henry VIII by Pope Leo X in 1521, back when Henry was still a Catholic. When the Catholic Church wouldn't grant him a divorce from his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, he started the Church of England, and was granted the title, Defender of the Faith, by an act of Parliament in 1544.
The whole thing about English kings and queens as defenders of the faith has been rather ridiculous from the start.
The whole church/state partnership was always an abomination.
Looks like he just can't wait to pull the plug on Mom...
They should really abolish the royal family already.
Sorry Charlie ... Only the best!
But he has well and truly lost it this time. He is nutz!
I have no problem if he wants to have a party after the coronation in which he can ask people of ther faiths to participate. Just like when people get married: the church wedding and the reception. The church wedding has to be a Christian wedding, not mixed ceremony. The reception, well, just like any other party, it can be anything (decent).
Amen, Lord, Please take the Prince utterly out of consideration and utterly out of public life at the earliest fitting moment and well before the Queen passes.
Hear our prayer, Dear Lord Jesus, in your Name.
Am I missing something? Isn't is Mother still alive and in no evidence of declining health? Isn't this rather bad form to be discussing his coronation while she's upright?
You are so correct in your assertion, HS.
The church of England has been progressively losing its power not just over the Monarchy but over Britain as a whole. To be sure, the "Divine Right of Kings" is a concept no longer in vogue(hasn't been for a long time). However, the English people will not stomach the trivialisation of "their" church or their monarchy by a would-be King. Tradition still means something in Great Britain, and if Charles tries to shun tradition his rulership will be in serious question before it has even begun. Most royals know, understand and accept that their power derives from God and not from people - unlike elected officials, they rule by the will of Almighty God often despite the will of the people. All we need to do is look to the Book of Common Prayer and to the prayer for the whole state of Christ's Church to find: "We beseech Thee also, so to direct and dispose the hearts of all Christian Rulers, that they may truly and impartially administer justice, to the punishment of wickedness and vice, and to the maintenance of Thy true religion, and virtue." I am sure the heir to the British throne will be soberly reminded that he rules by the will of the Almighty God: Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
Charlie still has some growing up to do!
Un-fricken-believable!
King Henry pushed through Parliament two acts that severed the ties of not just the church, but the whole nation, to Rome. The Act of Restraint in Appeals ended the Pope's appellate jurisdiction over all legal cases in England. The Act of Supremacy returned to the king the ability to appoint bishops and other high officials of the English church (that power had belonged to king until the 4th Lateran Council). The fact that these monumental bills met less opposition in Parliament than Henry's tax policies speaks volumes about the regard in which the church was held back then.
Following those changes, King Henry then proceeded to squash attempts by several bishops to introduce English services, married clergy, Communion in both kinds and several other Protestant reforms.
It was Elizabeth I who dropped the title of "Supreme Head of the Church of England" and replaced it with "Governor General of the Church of England".
Couldn't Prince Charles and John Kerry get together and do something that would keep them both too busy to get into trouble? They must think exactly alike. And they both will be dangerous if they get any bit of power.
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.