Happy Coronation Day
War Crimes and Genocide in Gaza?
Back in May 2024, the question was posed: Has Israel lost the war against Hamas? To recap: Israel’s original intention for counter attacking Hamas - its “jus ad bellum,” - i.e. the conditions under which states resort to war - was to recue the hostages and also to eliminate Hamas because of its ongoing threat to Israel. It was not revenge for the horrors of October 7 th , 2023, although that was the immediate cause. It was about the damage that Hamas could do in the future given it stated intent to annihilate Israel. Is Israel aiming for a realistic, achievable goals? Rescuing hostages is a clear and potentially achievable end. But is eliminating Hamas possible? How do you reduce civilian casualties in the face of Hamas tactics? Is her present strategy producing more chaos? Is her approach encouraging future terrorist attacks on her. Is there an alternative approach? As the war goes on and civilian deaths rise, questions increasingly surface about Israel’s conduct ...
??????? The coronation is on the 6th. Saturday. Am I missing something?!!
ReplyDeleteIs that what they told you?
DeleteIt's what my good friend Mr Google told me. 😁
DeleteThey moved it forward a day to avoid the rain (silly idea to hold it on a bank holiday, if you ask me). There must've been a mix up with your invitation. 😅
DeleteStrangely my invitations always seem to get lost in post 😎
Delete@ Clive
DeleteGot the scheduled date wrong! Should have been posted at 1am tomorrow morning.
Maybe Charles is bringing back Sandringham time.
Delete@Happy Jack
DeleteI was awake all night worrying I was going to miss it 😁
The National Catholic Reporter isn't usually the world's most reliable source of Catholic news, but this is an interesting sidelight on the coronation. It's a bit odd, however, that the NCR's Vatican correspondent has misspelt a well-known surname in his final paragraph.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/coronation-historic-ecumenical-moment-british-seminarians-rome
I like the cartoon! And the cupcakes ...
ReplyDeleteWell spotted!
Delete"The National Catholic Reporter isn't usually the world's most reliable source of Catholic news ... "
HJ never knew you went in for understatement, Ray.
That's why they call it the National Catholic Distorter.
DeleteThe results so far (138 councils counted) are bad for the Tories but not really all that bright for Starmer. The Lib Dems and the Greens together have picked up more formerly Tory seats than Labour has.
ReplyDeleteAnd the pollsters are apparently predicting a hung parliament on current voting intentions for a GE. Given the absolute state of the Tories at the moment, that's extraordinary. Starmer is not popular.
DeleteFour articles here in a Catholic Herald ‘Coronation Special’ edition.
ReplyDeleteBBC Radio 4 interviewed some anti-royalist protest groups this morning. None of them called themselves Just Stop Royals, which was disappointing.
ReplyDeleteJustin Welby was doing a good job of making the Coronation service sound as interesting as reading through the parts list for a flat pack wardrobe. Is he ever excited?
Ok I think he's done good.
DeleteI think that both archbishops come across as slippery snake oil salesmen. They push divisive and borderline racist ideologies and have been happy to assist with the systematic dismantling of English Christianity and culture in order to climb the ladder. The ability to read from a service book on a big state occasion isn't going to change my mind on that: they're both dangerous pastors and terrible ambassadors for the faith.
DeleteI was simply commenting on the service and his handling of it.
DeleteHe steered a steady course through it, for sure. I wouldn't want to have tried to put that crown on the King's head. I just find him very condescending, cold and joyless.
Delete雲水,
DeleteI guess it was in the interests of Welby and the CofE to make a good fist of this (it was also an occasion when Christianity was more 'acceptable' - just blame 'tradition' if there wasn't enough feminism and social justice stuff in it).
If it's of any interest, the God botherers I know in my adoptive country (who know even less about Anglicanism than I do) thought that it was in fact a very Christian ceremony.
Well I have to say hearing Charles pledge to defend the protestant faith etc was quite shocking in a way that seeing it written down isn't.
ReplyDeleteThe highlight for me was seeing the King kneel before the alter in nothing but a white shirt and trousers (obviously).
It underlined for me the deeply Christian heart of the service.
Yes, I wasn't expecting that. It was an impressive moment.
Delete@ Clive
DeleteWhich rather begs the question: just what is the 'protestant faith'?
At the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in 1953, no Catholic entered the basilica. Archbishop William Godfrey, the Apostolic Nuncio at the time – the first since the Reformation – attended the procession to Westminster Abbey but did not enter. The then Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Bernard Griffin, did not attend but celebrated a mass for the Queen the day before the ceremony.
The term protestant is well by it's sell by date. It doesn't mean that there isn't a coherent theology in these churches, it's just not necessarily the same set of beliefs.
DeleteIn the context of the coronation, doesn't it mean "not Roman Catholic"?
DeleteIt seems King Charles harbours inclinations towards the Greek Orthodox faith. A report in the Guardian in 2004 suggested that the then Prince Charles had become enamoured of the Orthodox faith to the point that he adorned a section of his home at Highgrove with prized Byzantine icons. Many are believed to originate from Mount Athos.
“There is no question that the British royal is Orthodox in his heart,” a monk confided to the Guardian as Charles was making a secret visit to Mount Athos. “Sadly, he is very constrained by his position,” the monk added.
The British newspaper reported that when the prince arrived in Athos days after the death of Princess Diana, it was Abbot Ephraim of the Vatopedion Monastery who induced him to join the faith. Closeted in a chamber alone with the abbot, Charles is believed to have made a “spiritual commitment” to Christian Orthodoxy.
This has been denied by Buckingham Palace.
No it means , don't mess with the constitution, as it'll be a major pain in the arse for someone to sort.
DeleteOtherwise it would have been removed by now.
@ Clive - how can there be a coherent theology without a shared set of beliefs?
DeleteJack is right; the Coronation Oath was set out in the Coronation Oath Act 1688, which replaced the pledge to 'protect and defend the Bishops and Churches under [my] Government' with an explicit promise to defend the Protestant faith. This was a result of the so-called Glorious Revolution, which deposed the last Catholic king of England (James II) and replaced him with his daughter, Mary II, and her Protestant husband William III. The changes to the oath both placed the monarch under the authority of parliament (instead of vice versa) and explicitly ensured that he or she were 'not a Roman Catholic'.
@ Jack - I have heard rumours that the king made more than a spiritual commitment to Orthodoxy on Athos. The truth of that, I don't know. But his commitment to Greece and the Orthodox Church runs deep. It's also worth remembering that his grandmother was a nun and that his cousins, the Romanovs, are now saints (passion bearers) of the Russian Orthodox Church.
@ Lain
DeleteGiven Anglican "comprehensiveness" maybe there'll be an Anglo-Orthodox movement!
@Lain,
DeleteWhat I was trying to say was the term Protestant has been stretched to include so many different Churches, anything from the Church of Scotland to the wackiest Charismatic, that as a term it's become meaningless. Within this umbrella term, you do find individual denominations who have agreed set of beliefs and a coherent theology.
I wasn't commenting on whether they were right and I'm not saying that across the broad spectrum of Protestant churches that they together share an agreed set of beliefs, although obviously there are areas of generally common agreement.
With regards Jack's point, historically it's correct. It isn't today, it's there because it's to much hassle to remove and generally most politicians feel that they have more pressing issues.
Was arresting the antimonarchist demonstrators the right thing to do? I suspect it probably was, for conspiring to commit a public nuisance or something along those lines, though it's not clear to me exactly what actions they were planning.
ReplyDeleteIt's unclear why they were arrested. There's a right to protest but it's been suggested they were carrying materials that could be used to tie themselves to railings and obstruct the celebrations.
DeletePolice said the 52 arrests were made for offences including affray, public order offences, breach of the peace and conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. 32 were arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance.
Have they been charged with anything, Jack, do you know? Or are they going to be? Or were they just kept at a safe distance from the festivities until they were all over and then sent home?
DeleteI have read that some were deliberately trying to frighten the police horses. I don't know if it's true.
DeleteIt's not a good look when the police are happy to let eco lunatics delay the plebs getting to work or hospital, but turn up to protest the royals and you're straight in handcuffs.
DeleteI personally think that protesting the coronation is the height of redundant narcissism, but either everyone is allowed a right to protest or nobody is.
This is a bit worrying.
Delete"Protest is lawful and it can be disruptive," Commander Karen Findlay, leading the day's operation, said - pointing to numerous protests that had been policed without any arrests. Officers, she said, have a duty to intervene "when protest becomes criminal and may cause serious disruption. This depends on the context. The Coronation is a once in a generation event and that is a key consideration in our assessment."
The Coronation is a once in a generation event and that is a key consideration in our assessment."
DeleteI think they're right to take that into account.
Why?
DeleteThis article makes some valid points:
What century is this? I ask because today, in London, peaceful protesters have been handcuffed and arrested for daring to express disapproval of King Charles. For daring to believe Britain should be a republic, not a constitutional monarchy. This is a grotesque assault on freedom. It is borderline medieval. No one’s feelings, not even the King’s, should ever trump the people’s right to freely express their beliefs in public.
The footage coming out of Trafalgar Square shames Britain. We’ve seen protesters in ‘Not My King’ t-shirts being arrested. Cops apparently seized hundreds of placards. Graham Smith, the head of the campaign group Republic, has reportedly been arrested too. ‘Is this democracy?’, Republic has asked. No, it is not. A serious democracy does not put people in police vans for saying things it disapproves of.
Some argue that the coronation is not the right place to make a political statement. I disagree. The coronation itself is a political statement. It is a loud, noisy, pomp-filled declaration that Britain remains a monarchy and that Charles, by divine right, is our King. This is the perfect event for republican dissent, for the peaceful expression of an alternative view. Namely, that Charles should not be King; that no one should be.
I didn't watch because I didn't care. I only checked in with the ceremony after reading Peter Hitchens this morning who, despite being an arch-royalist, was signally unimpressed. But then, the wingnut at the centre of it was signally unimpressive. Pretty much the story of his life. Hitchens description of Penny Mordaunt as looking like "one of the fiercer and more demanding Roman goddesses" peaked my interest. He was right.
ReplyDeleteFrom Adrian Hilton:
ReplyDelete"And I must also say – because he tends mainly to be on the receiving end of general carping and criticism – that the Archbishop of Canterbury did really, really well today. Flawless presiding, glorious liturgy, impeccably articulated."
Hmmm ....
From TCW:
Delete"The ceremony was mostly impressive but inevitably spoiled by the wittering of the weasel Welby and his vainglorious attempt to ask all and sundry to swear allegiance to the King. I am by no means an expert on God-botherers but rarely have I observed a sky-pilot so unsuited to his profession as this cleric. He officiated the ceremony with the conviction and gravitas of a speaking clock. One hesitates to think what other vocation to which he might have been better suited: perhaps as one of those chappies who give me parking tickets, or secretary of a village bowls club."