Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family
Original poster

Will you be swearing allegiance?

329 replies

PolkaDotMankini · 29/04/2023 23:27

BBC link: Public asked to swear allegiance to King Charles

Apparently during the coronation service, we'll all being asked to swear "true allegiance" to Charles and his heirs.

That's a no from me.

The new photos were taken in the Blue Drawing Room at Buckingham Palace

Coronation: Public asked to swear allegiance to King Charles

The pledge is among several changes to the service, which will incorporate female clergy and other faiths.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65435426

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Wouldlovetobeinthesun · 30/04/2023 12:37

Categorical no.

MrsSkylerWhite · 30/04/2023 12:38

Why? Don’t even know the man.

LadyWiddiothethird · 30/04/2023 12:39

No.Get rid of the Royal Family.

BringBackCoffeeCreams · 30/04/2023 12:40

Absolutely not. I've always been a 'better the devil you know' when it comes to the monarchy. This has tipped me over into being a republican.

MsFannySqueers · 30/04/2023 12:40

Another No from me. I respected the late Queen but I don’t much respect Charles. I feel he has gone a bit ‘bridezilla’ over the whole Coronation. I realise he has waited a long time to be King but he’s just jumping on every bandwagon he can now. I imagine he wakes up every day with a new idea to add to the day. What a nightmare for the organisers he must be.

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 30/04/2023 12:52

"Be thy head anointed with holy oil: as kings, priests, and prophets were anointed. And as Solomon was anointed king by Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet, so be you anointed, blessed and consecrated Queen over the Peoples, whom the Lord thy God hath given thee to rule and govern

But where in the Bible does it associate this promise with the Windsor family or any other modern monarchy? Absolutely anybody could claim that something in the Bible applies specifically to them and then, before long, it becomes 'true because we know it must be true'.

It does say in the Bible that it wasn't God's plan for there to be a monarch at all, but the people demanded one, so God allowed them to have one.

I've also never found any explanation about a weird phrase that the Queen said to Charles at his inauguration as PoW: "This dragon gives you your power, your throne, and your authority." Was 'this dragon' meant to represent Wales? If so, how come the country itself is giving power to its own ruler, ergo to itself, if the whole justification of monarchy is meant to be that it is the absolute gift of God?

More to the point, why was the Queen quoting Revelation 13:2 - referring to the Antichrist - and claiming it as the source of the power of a supposedly Judeo-Christian divinely-instituted monarchy?

Flappingtarps · 30/04/2023 12:52

SerenadeOfTheSchoolRun · 30/04/2023 12:20

I think you are right that this will bring home to people what the Monarchy is supposed to be. We haven’t seen this for 70 years and have accepted the status quo. It is a very religious service with The Eucharist and explicitly says that God is supporting the King to rule over us. If you take it all literally and think logically then it could create republican feeling.

However, I think they is a history, tradition, mystery and spirituality to it that would be such a shame to lose. I will enjoy the spectacle and not take it all literally the same way I do when I am at church.

I’ve just posted on another thread about the divine right of kings and not understanding why monarchy is linked to Christianity in the 21st century, despite us having an established church.

I understand this is about symbolism and about the institution, not the individuals involved, but surely living as a King and Queen surrounded by huge wealth and privilege, at the heart of the establishment, is about as far from the Christian message as one can get?

None of it makes any objective sense to me at all and I think if the British monarchy really was bent on serving its people, then the first thing it should have done after a seventy year reign, during which so much about our society has changed, is to have given us a choice as to whether we wanted to be subjects or not?

Flappingtarps · 30/04/2023 12:54

AutumnCrow · 30/04/2023 12:05

The Archbishop is going to turn to camera 1 and, raising his jazz hands, cry out, 'all together now!'

And afterwards, in true Richard Osman style, he'll intone, 'And well done to everyone at home who said the pointless thing'.

😃😃

SerenadeOfTheSchoolRun · 30/04/2023 13:00

It is toned down from the Queen’s Coronation by quite a bit. They prayed that she ‘may not bear the Sword in vain;
but may use it as the minister of God
for the terror and punishment of evildoers,
and for the protection and encouragement of those that do well’.

Although the King still gets a sword and amongst other things should use it to ‘punish and reform what is amiss’.

I guess this is all symbolic of the fact that the Monarch is the head of State and the Justice system operates in their name. To get on board with it, I don’t think it can be about the individual.

The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II

https://www.oremus.org/liturgy/coronation/1953/

vera99 · 30/04/2023 13:01

Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 22But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.23And Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” 25When the disciples heard this, they were very astonished and said, “Then who can be saved?” 26And looking at them Jesus said to them, “With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

#notmyking

SerenadeOfTheSchoolRun · 30/04/2023 13:25

If I were a Republican who had infiltrated 'royal' PR this is exactly the sort of shit I'd encourage

You are probably right sadly. You either go with it for all its absurdity and have a Monarchy and all that brings our country for good or bad. Or we all decide it is madness, do away with it and then we don’t anymore. There would be no going back.

They already don’t have any practical power so we have already got a compromise that works. Not sure what we could do to the coronation that would make it authentic but more acceptable to more people. I think they have tried.

Novella4 · 30/04/2023 13:28

They could start with NOT having a coronation at all !

No need for it
It's PR pure and simple .
It was designed in the Middle Ages to quieten any rabble who started asking questions
'Look god says I'm king and I've a shiny hat so do one '

Nothing would be affected if we didn't have one

And Charles can turn up in a suit to open parliament as and when

Novella4 · 30/04/2023 13:29

It's medieval cosplay for people who fanatise about Empire

derxa · 30/04/2023 13:35

I think I will say it having read all these replies. I would rather have Charles than most of you lot as HOS.

HairyToity · 30/04/2023 13:47

No way. I'd love a referendum on the monarchy.

Flappingtarps · 30/04/2023 13:53

SerenadeOfTheSchoolRun · 30/04/2023 13:00

It is toned down from the Queen’s Coronation by quite a bit. They prayed that she ‘may not bear the Sword in vain;
but may use it as the minister of God
for the terror and punishment of evildoers,
and for the protection and encouragement of those that do well’.

Although the King still gets a sword and amongst other things should use it to ‘punish and reform what is amiss’.

I guess this is all symbolic of the fact that the Monarch is the head of State and the Justice system operates in their name. To get on board with it, I don’t think it can be about the individual.

Thank you you very much for the explanations Serenadeoftheschoolrun even for a Republican they are very much appreciated.

FraiseRoyale · 30/04/2023 13:59

Doesn't it replace the swearing of fealty by the peers? In that case, it's much more democratic and modern than previous practice.

feellikeanalien · 30/04/2023 15:13

I'm pretty indifferent about the RF but whoever thought this up was definitely a closet Republican. If anything it should be the other way round and Charles should be swearing his allegiance to the people of "his realms".

I think many people who were either supportive or indifferent about the coronation will now have a negative view. I am quite looking forward to it now. Maybe Harry will stand up and refuse to swear allegiance and that will start a domino effect in Westminster Abbey. Now that would be worth seeing. Maybe that's why Harry is only making a flying visit.😀

RedVanYellowVan · 30/04/2023 15:15

I don't identify as a medieval serf so no.

Swearing allegiance to a tax avoiding adulterer is not something I feel comfortable with. I would have a dim view of anyone who did frankly and they would lose my respect.

GettingThereCharleyBear · 30/04/2023 15:22

@derxa and the beauty of a democracy is that we would get to make a choice. So looks like we’re both republicans 😂

derxa · 30/04/2023 15:29

RedVanYellowVan · 30/04/2023 15:15

I don't identify as a medieval serf so no.

Swearing allegiance to a tax avoiding adulterer is not something I feel comfortable with. I would have a dim view of anyone who did frankly and they would lose my respect.

But i'm not that concerned about being respected by you.

Rockybooboo · 30/04/2023 16:01

derxa · 30/04/2023 13:35

I think I will say it having read all these replies. I would rather have Charles than most of you lot as HOS.

I don't think any of us are volunteering are we?

Hintofreality · 30/04/2023 16:02

😂😂😂 No fucking chance! Anyone who does needs certifying pronto.

Reasonableadjustments · 30/04/2023 16:09

No.

annonymousse · 30/04/2023 16:17

It's a no from me and I am a royalist at heart but this is a step too far.