Adultery, the Church of England and the Coronation of Charles & Camilla

[Inspectamus]

Discussed as a thread on Gransnet, but not on Mumsnet. What does Mumsnet think?

"The Church of England has never crowned a divorced man as King, let alone one who has publicly confessed to adultery – with the relevant woman expecting to be crowned Queen Consort," Holden writes.

I think that in these corona-virus and coronation times the Church of England should not be taking liberties with God’s Ten Commandments. But they’re doing it anyway, without explaining to the people and the world how they’re reconciling the conflict in what they preach and their new King & Queen’s actions.

How can Charles and Camilla view their adultery as a mistake if it was the means to achieve what they desired?
This, in my view, sets a bad example as Supreme Governors of the Church of England’s Christian faith and as defenders of the faith.

I’m having a crisis of faith, as it happens. For me, Charles and Camilla’s religious coronation will be evidence that the God behind the Ten Commandments cannot exist.

I got that wrong, so presumably the church either refused to marry him or the Queen refused to allow him to marry in church.
But with the Coronation he becomes the Supreme Head of the Church of England. How is that allowed when he married his mistress? Or when they are not even married in church?
I wish this was still a Christian country.

Their marriage was blessed in church. According to the Duchess of Sussex she wasn’t married in church either.

So the Archbishop of Canterbury refused to marry them in church. Good to see someone has religious ethics.

Actually, I don't think there was a refusal. As I recall, it was negotiated, with everyone, including the Queen, agreeing that a civil ceremony followed by a church blessing was the best approach. By giving the blessing, the church did validate the marriage.

Chapeau!

They both broke their marriage vows I think you will find.
If the church allows divorced people to marry why can’t you accept it or does your opinion carry more weight than the powers that be within the church? There is no outrage (other than yours) because people understand that he was pressured into marrying Diana.
But let’s ignore that, imagine she never died and they’re still married, living in misery for the benefit of all the Christians out there.

If C hadn't married Diana, Prince Andrew would be next in line to the throne.

Is there belief in forgiveness and redemption in CoE?

He'd have married someone else, though, given he was under pressure to marry anyone suitable.

I've pointed this out to the OP a few times now (different threads) but it just gets ignored. I don't think it fits with their very very specific views about Christianity and the British Royal family

So OP doesn’t really care about CoE or Christianity; obviously. Seems they are mocking people.

I been on a fair number of threads with this OP under various user names and I dither between what I think her intentions are. I'm not sure there's much point bothering any more to be fair, if the OP is genuine then she (i presume she) needs far more help than she will get from these wierd threads she starts on MN, whether that's theological support for a crisis of faith or other help

^

When someone puts into words what you are thinking.

As a republican atheist I wonder what the point of the church of England is if not even the person at the top follows the rules.

Forgiveness doesn't come into this. The act of forgiving doesn't magically turn KC into the best person for the job of head of the church. This is about hypocrisy, entitlement and lack of morals. If KC was so into Camilla he could have given up his title and marry her - Edward managed it with Wallis Simpson and the world didn't end. But no. Charles wanted the privileges without the responsibilities. He was happy to go into church and lie in front of his family, the church and the world. He clearly doesn't regret it. His children are still living with the consequences of his selfishness. This is our head of state.

The coronation will basically make a mockery of the church of England. And I think the clergy know it. But hey at least we won't have both Charles and Boris in power at the same time. Sigh.

I imagine if that ever was an issue the Queen could have pulled strings if needs be. It's interesting that the Queen had an unshakeable faith which seemed to be at the heart of her service and no doubt her innate morality as well. Joking aside the OP has every right to raise this as a pertinent issue and one that matters if our course any of this arcane stuff matters with a constitutional ,hereditary monarch. If we had a long overdue seperation of Church and State then all this goes away but then so does some of the supposed magic and mystery of it all as well. One would imagine that any desire for reform would have to come from the RF rather than the Church,

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/09/queen-had-no-fear-of-death-says-archbishop-of-canterbury-justin-welby

Very well said. Scripturally though it could be argued he has repented ,sought forgiveness and therefore is righteous in the eyes of the Lord.

John 7:53–8:11 in the New Revised Standard Version:

53 Then each of them went home, 8:1 while Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him and he sat down and began to teach them. 3The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, 4they said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. 5Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." 8And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again."

— John 7:53–8:11, NRSV[4]

When did he repent? I understood he had not. To truly repent you have to accept responsibility. He continues to lie and say that his affair with Camilla started far later than it did.
And those talking about how Diana behaved are missing the point. Charles is not just another divorced and remarried individual he is head of the church. We rightly expect better behaviour from senior members of the church. If Archbishop of Canterbury for example did something immoral it would not be viewed in the same way as a member of a local parish church doing the same.
@DewinDwl I agree the coronation will make a mockery of the Church of England.

I have no idea why one person is suggesting I am not a Christian. I am a practising Christian. And I know I am not the only Christian unhappy at what is happening. I fully believe that if we were still a Christian country there would be outrage at this Coronation. But we no longer are.
I wish the OP though had posted this in the religion board to avoid the mocking that some have posted on this thread.

Proverbs 6:16-19
There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.

John 2:1-29
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him

Forgiveness does not mean you can do what you want and it is okay.

You are of course absolutely right the whole Monarch is the Head of the Church of England is a historic nonsense. That said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. The Established Church is headed up by the Archbishop one has to assume that if he is content then the matter is decided. If as a celebrant you are not happy with that then you are at rights to express your displeasure which you have and/or leave the Church for one that aligns better with your principles. If it was me I would write a letter to the Archbishop , your Dioscean Bishop and your Vicar outlining your concerns and see what they say.

What can the Archbishop do though? Charles and Camilla were already denied a marriage in a church and instead given a blessing. The Monarch constitutionally becomes Head of the Church, to change that you have to change the constitutional law. The Archbishop could make representations to the government to do that, but can not himself change those arrangements.

I am reminded of Jesus who cast out those who sold and bought in the Temple. If Jesus was on Earth he would cast out Charles from the Cathedral.

Would he? He blessed the thief who was crucified next to him.

Well he's not shy of intoning on political matters and rightly so. If he were to publically raise this issue then he would come under enormous fire from the Establishment. In his wisdom he has probably squared it as the part of his duties when it is necessary to hold his tongue and accept the established order for the sake of the greater good. Keep his powder dry as it were.

What is patently obvious is Charles is not the Queen and will never have her moral authority and dignity because that is earned not given.

I have a lot of respect for the CofE because it is indeed a broad church embracing diversity of faith from almost atheistic humanism right to full on evangelism ,has embraced female clergy whole heartedly and has a moral , upstanding role of trying to hold truth to power. It certainly is no longer the Tory party at prayer anymore.

The Thief offers up the simple prayer, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” Jesus accepts His repentance and gives him the promise that the thief on the cross will be with him in paradise.

Are you a Christian? Because if yes your understanding of scripture is poor.