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.

It's not theoretically impossible just highly unlikely.

The infinite monkey theorem states that a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type any given text, such as the complete works of William Shakespeare

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

The way this going could be Thomas Becket in the Cathedral. Archbishops are right to be wary of monarchs as is Parliament.

He has praised Meghan, saying: 'She's a person of profound humanity and deep concern for people, seeking to carry out her role with every ounce of her being – and I think she's a remarkable person.'

In 2021 he expressed sympathy for Harry, telling the Financial Times that being in the Royal Family was 'life without parole' and the public expected them to be 'superhuman'.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11687851/Archbishop-Canterbury-Justin-Welby-fallen-spell-Harry-Meghan-say-Palace-sources.html

vera99 · Today 02:35
He has praised Meghan, saying: 'She's a person of profound humanity and deep concern for people, seeking to carry out her role with every ounce of her being – and I think she's a remarkable person.'

Just an indication of how gullible the clergy can be! I agree she IS a "remarkable person" - tho' not in the way Welby meant..

Who are we to judge ?He is the Archbishop of Canterbury and a good and worldly man who spent 11 years as an executive in oil companies before getting the call and becoming ordained. He is on the evangelical wing of the CofE. He has met them on multiple occasions and I have no doubts as to his ethics and morality. If he says these things then he believes them to be true and no doubt for good reason. If that opinion doesn't align with the establishment narrative then so be it.

vera99 · Today 07:26
Who are we to judge ?He is the Archbishop of Canterbury and a good and worldly man who spent 11 years as an executive in oil companies before getting the call and becoming ordained.

I know who is he is. I'm one of his "flock". Bring back Rowan!

He is not even married in the eyes of God to Camilla.

I think you’ll find it is. The church blessed that marriage.

I loved Rowan truly a great man in every respect. Went to hear his Easter talks at Westminster Abbey talking for 40 minutes with great authority on memes or some such it was interesting at the time and beautifully argued but probbaly could have been got over in a minute. He was a giant in stature as well, I once spotted him walking from the Abbey to Lambeth Palace and ran trying to get to him just to say hello and thank him for his wonderful service. But wearing his cassock he seemed to go at the speed of light and even running couldn't catch up with him. If anybody could have converted me it was him. Fascinating to watch him debate with Richard Dawkins - it's all about community that was the essence of his distilled faith or my takeaway at least.

vera99 · Today 12:39

Love your post. Great to know we do agree on something!

Still not married.

You’re being utterly ridiculous. If they hadn’t been married the church couldn’t or wouldn’t have blessed the marriage. The lack of logic is staggering.

God is over it and happy for them

@BadgerB and@vera99 , a friend of mine met Rowan at some church thing over in the west country or Wales. She adored him. He was so one of her heroes. She died some years ago and I think she'd approve of the fact that I bought Rowan's book about a century of poems for searching the heart.

We need to start a Rowan love-in. He has a wonderful ethereal presence and his thoughtful use and beauty in the way he uses words and tones in his speaking is just mesmeric. It must be his inherent welshness. His time at college was tinged with sadness though as one of his fellow students fell into unrequited love with him and committed suicide an event that has haunted him and no doubt shaped his faith. I doubt we will see a more holy and good man in our lifetimes. If you ever want to know what is the right answer to a question just ask "what would Rowan do" and there's your answer.

(he wouldn't abolish the monarchy though so maybe I'll be deaf at that point....)

virtueonline.org/ukrowan-williams-haunted-suicide-troubled-oxford-student-who-fell-him

It's not a recognised COE marriage . Charles and Camilla are not married according to the rules of COE .

How interesting .
No wonder I read about a constitutional crisis re Charles Windsor becoming head of COE re his divorce etc . All that debate is now hard to find online .
How very ..... coincidental.

www.churchofengland.org/life-events/your-church-wedding/planning-your-ceremony/wedding-blessings

No wonder I read about a constitutional crisis re Charles Windsor becoming head of COE re his divorce etc . All that debate is now hard to find online

No it isn't hard to find.
I remember it happening at the time - don't you?

I meant the recent flurry of controversy when Charles became king .
It just disappeared and no one mentions it now

There was a commentator or MP maybe who said the face that Charlie admitted adultery and was divorced meant he couldn't also be head of COE
Forgiveness and all that is irrelevant. He was referring to his state and religious role

Maybe everyone who criticises the king online is abducted and taken to the Tower of London...

Or maybe most people don't really care.

It just disappeared and no one mentions it now

You do. And have again.

How very …. Predictable.

@AnorLondo

Most people do t care

But the royals must spend a large percentage of the money they take from the state in bots and google management

@ArcaneWireless

I meant national debate

Not mumsnet squabbles

It was Anthony Holden

Former royalist and respected writer who saw the light and became a republican

Not sent to tower but ....

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10075751/amp/Royal-author-detested-Charles-files-Prince-stolen.html

The post was unclear.

Resurrecting a thread that no one has posted on for over 10 days just looks like a one sided squabble for the sake of it.

Like a mumsnet echo chamber.

It's not a recognised COE marriage

Don’t be ridiculous, of course it is. The Archbishop of Canterbury blessed it.

I can see where you're coming from.