[Jesus] has a name written on his robe and on his thigh: King of kings and Lord of lords.Revelation 19:16
Note: all photographs in this post were copied, without permission, from the abcNEWS article, “The Coronation of King Charles & Queen Camilla“.
Today I am going to offer a few thoughts on King Charles III, his coronation, and The Monarchy in general.
I was born and raised in “The Old Country.” I love England, its people, and its storied history. In fact, as I write this post I am drinking a cup of tea.
In 2023 there is, reportedly, an unprecedented amount of homegrown dissent surrounding the entire “Constitutional Monarchy” system. Some of it has to do with “the cost” and a lot of it questions the relevancy anymore of kings and queens and “nobility”.
Personally I am not a monarchist. I reject the idea that anyone is higher, more entitled, better, or above another human being by virtue of their birth. The same applies to race, gender, wealth, ethnicity, religious affiliation, nationality etc.
That said, there is so much more to this story than anything that can be changed by the stroke of a pen or an act of parliament.
The history of the kings and queens of England (and the elements that make up the United Kingdom) is so bound up in the national identity – the soul of the country – that dismantling the monarchy would in my estimation do irreparable damage. And that includes economic hardship.
In fiscal terms the royal family are a good deal for the U.K. The taxpayer expense versus the revenue – everything from tourism writ large to spin-off merchandizing – is good value for money.
The truth is that all cultures have “royalty” (have you read People Magazine recently?) – it’s just a matter of how we define them!
What I would like to see is an acceleration of the initiatives King Charles has already started. Ever since he was a young man Charles lobbied for a “modernization” of the monarchy, and recently it appears that he sees that as involving streamlining too.
Speed up the “drawdown” that started generations ago:
England/Great Britain avoided the kind of revolution that decimated the crowned heads of the European mainland by gradually and (kind of) voluntarily ceding more and more authority to parliament. And within parliament itself a series of moves effectively removed all but ceremonial power from the House of Lords.
But streamlining also means downsizing, and this is where I believe the future must take not only the reign of Charles, but even more so his son William and grandson Georgie.
I always had great respect for the late queen, Elizabeth II, (see my post in response to her funeral) and by extension the institution she not only preserved but improved. Her power as monarch was only titular, but her moral authority was real; she and her family proved themselves during World War Two, the she reigned with integrity, and grace, and a very real love for her people.
If King Charles is to succeed he must be humble, virtuous, generous, and lit up with grace. Then it will rest on William to win the trust of the people through rectitude and virtue, and to be a visionary leader in the dismantling of classism.
As I said, I am not a monarchist. But I do love England, and I cannot imagine it dressed in any other costume than – at the very least – the Crown Jewels. DEREK