King Charles is in a row with Church of England leaders “over the role of non-Christian faiths” in his upcoming May 6th coronation ceremony. Charles is insisting on a ceremony “to better reflect the modern monarchy,” as opposed to celebrating the history of Britain. So he has insisted on the participation of representatives of the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and other faith traditions. “This has prompted a deadlock with church officials, who warn that the move would clash with centuries-old canon law,” but Charles is getting support from woke circles.
The Church of England represents Britain’s historic Christian roots. It would be refreshing to recall this now, as Christianity is an increasingly persecuted religion, not only under threat from Islam, but now increasingly from wokeism. An example of the latter: Christian leaders are now virtually being forced to outwardly disavow the scriptural verse “male and female He created them,” or else they risk be accused of “hate.” Yet Islamic countries fully embrace, with immense pride, their Islamic practices, culture and traditions, and make no apologies for Islamic supremacist encroachment in Western countries. Every country, in fact, honors its own religious traditions in formal ceremonies, with the exception of the West, and most notably of Britain now, with the upcoming coronation. The Express points out that “while Charles will remain the Defender of the Faith, it is understood the monarch will speak about his commitment to multiple religions.”
Charles will have a hard time balancing “his commitment to multiple religions” with specific aspects of Islam that are contrary to British culture and Christian tradition; such as war with infidels, full coverings for women, sex slavery and wife-beating.
“Fight for the sake of Allah, and be aware that Allah is hearer, knower.” Qur’an 2:244
“Warfare is commanded for you, even though it is odious for you, but it may happen that you hate something that is good for you, and it may happen that you love something that is bad for you. Allah knows, you do not know.” Qur’an 2:216
“As for those who disbelieve, I will punish them with a heavy punishment in this world and the hereafter, and they will have no helpers.” Qur’an 3:56
“Men are in charge of women, because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend of their property. So good women are obedient, guarding in secret what Allah has guarded. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, give them a warning and banish them to separate beds, and beat them. Then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Indeed, Allah is always high, exalted, great.” Qur’an 4:34
“Let those who sell the life of this world for the next fight in the way of Allah. Whoever fights in the way of Allah, whether he is killed or victorious, on him we will bestow a great reward.” Qur’an 4:74
“Those who believe fight for the sake of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight for the cause of taghut [idol worship]. So fight the minions of Satan. Indeed, Satan’s strategy is always weak.” Qur’an 4:76
“Those of the believers who sit still, other than those who have an injury, are not equal with those who wage jihad in the way of Allah with their wealth and lives. Allah has conferred on those who wage jihad with their wealth and lives a rank above the sedentary. Allah has promised good to each, but he has bestowed on those who wage jihad a great reward above that of the sedentary.” Qur’an 4:95
“And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only what is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment except to their own husbands or fathers or husbands’ fathers, or their sons or their husbands’ sons, or their brothers or their brothers’ sons or sisters’ sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack desire, or children who know nothing of women’s nakedness. And do not let them stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn to Allah together, O believers, so that you may succeed.” Qur’an 24:31
“O prophet, indeed, we have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have paid their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses of those whom Allah has given you as spoils of war, and the daughters of your uncle on the father’s side and the daughters of your aunts on the father’s side, and the daughters of your uncle on the mother’s side and the daughters of your aunts on the mother’s side who emigrated with you, and a believing woman if she gives herself to the prophet and the prophet desires to take her in marriage, a privilege for you alone, not for the believers. We are aware of what we commanded them regarding their wives and those whom their right hands possess, so that you may be free from blame, for Allah is always for- giving, merciful.” Qur’an 33:50
“O prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their veils close around them. That will be better, so that they may be recognized and not molested. Allah is always forgiving, merciful.” Qur’an 33:59
“Aisha said, ‘I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women’” Sahih Bukhari 72:715
Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) came and sought permission to see Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him). He found people sitting at his door and none amongst them had been granted permission, but it was granted to Abu Bakr and he went in. Then came ‘Umar and he sought permission and it was granted to him, and he found Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) sitting sad and silent with his wives around him. He (Hadrat ‘Umar) said: I would say something which would make the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) laugh, so he said: Messenger of Allah, I wish you had seen (the treatment meted out to) the daughter of Khadija when you asked me some money, and I got up and slapped her on her neck. Allah’s Messenger (mav peace be upon him) laughed and said: They are around me as you see, asking for extra money. Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) then got up went to ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) and slapped her on the neck, and ‘Umar stood up before Hafsa and slapped her saying: You ask Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) which he does not possess. Sahih Bukhari 9:3506
The future King of England is uprooting Christianity, which recognizes the full equality of males and females, and of all humans, and sending a strong message to the Church of England and to the world.
Consider these headlines also:
- Prince Charles accepted $1,217,760 from Osama bin Laden’s family
- Prince Charles accepted suitcases and shopping bags stuffed with $3.2 million in cash from Qatari sheikh
- Prince Charles “fascinated by Islamic culture,” prays in Arabic for peace in the Middle East, “inshallah”
This row is a sign of things to come under Britain’s new king.
“Charles sparks huge row with Church leaders over Coronation role of non-Christian faiths,” by Oli Smith, Express, April 8, 2023:
King Charles is at an impasse with Church of England leaders over the role of non-Christian faiths in the Coronation ceremony. Charles, who wants the ceremony to better reflect the modern monarchy, has insisted that figures of Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and other faith leaders should participate in the event. However, this has prompted a deadlock with church officials, who warn that the move would clash with centuries-old canon law, according to the Mail on Sunday.
Religious affairs commentator Catherine Pepinster revealed the tensions could wreak havoc on the ceremony.
She said that the row has delayed the release of the Coronation’s Order of Service, with less than 28 days to go.
Church officials reportedly claim that canon law “bars non-Christian faith leaders from reading out prayers during the service”.
However, Buckingham Palace sources rejected any claims of a delay.
Lambeth Palace, on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Buckingham Palace, stated: “Details about the Coronation service will be released in due course.”
The role of other faiths in the Coronation comes as Charles is expected to recognise that he serves all religious faiths and not just the Church of England when he speaks at the ceremony.
While Charles will remain the Defender of the Faith, it is understood the monarch will speak about his commitment to multiple religions.
The King has long expressed a desire to represent the UK’s increasingly diverse population.
The Coronation is being planned by the Earl Marshal, the Duke of Norfolk, who organised the late Queen’s funeral.
In October last year, the Constitution Unit at University College London recommended the King swear to defend all religious faiths.
The UCL academics claimed that such a change to the coronation oath would better reflect modern, multicultural Britain.
Professor Robert Hazell and Dr Bob Morris said the oath taken by Queen Elizabeth II at her coronation in 1953 – during which she promised to be “Defender of the Faith upholding the rights of the Church of England” – no longer suits modern Britain…..
Hoi Polloi says
Many speculate that KC is a muslim convert. It’s easy to see its appeal to him as he would not have been held to the higher standards that have brought him down.
He’d be a king in the sense that he appreciates; one with the right to a harem, who wouldn’t need to hide his machinations to thieve more land, who could openly write off the raped and trafficked children, who could just honor kill his troublesome son (or his first wife or brother), and one for whom extorting jewels and shopping bags and suitcases of cash from ME powers to pretend a stadium is not blood-built in a land of current and ongoing slavery would be the accepted norm.
somehistory says
I believe you are right. Not only would he not incur the wrath of the many thousands, upon thousands of mozlums…like the many mozlum mayors of cities across the U.K….but he could openly adopt all of the psychopathic actions in which devout mozlums engage.
He has dressed in mozlum attire and he threw over his first wife for an affair with another woman, evidently has no affection for his sons; and who knows what else is in his heart and soul for the future of the country over which he has public authority…not governmental, but social.
bill says
I am no fan of KC or the family in general, but if he had been allowed to marry the woman he loved instead of being forced into an unhappy marriage, to suit protocals now largely dismissed, A great deal of unhappiness and tragedy would have been avoided. The late queen did a lot of meddling in the lives of her family which is being forgotten and is why
I do not hold her in the exaggerated respect voiced by many of her ‘subjects’ and admirers.
Barbara says
Camila was married for years by the time Chucky married. He dithered when both he and Camila were single. This is on him.
Yes Elizabeth interfered where she should not have. She was a dictator.
Barbara says
Camila was married for years by the time Chucky married. He dithered when both he and Camila were single. This is on him.
Yes Elizabeth interfered where she should not have. She was a dictator.
MD Anthony says
Plenty of evidence suggesting Diana was an honor killing
End PC says
The Anglican bishops unhappy with his “Defender of Faith” stance with Muslims & other non-Anglican religious persons invited should stick to their convictions and refuse to participate in the coronation, come what may. Wonder if they have the courage.
alan catterall says
If Charles wants a more modern Britain and keep up with the rest of the world , then go the whole hog and make the UK a democratic republic ! .This monopoly by The House of Hanover/ Saxe – Coburg Gotha (Windsor ) is undemocratic and unelected by the people ; the same goes for The House of Lords ; the overseers of the commoners . No matter which party you vote into power at N010 , the real power is The King and the kingmakers . We are still living the lie and the big con that we live in a free country ; we do not ! . we are still subjects and not true citizens !.
bonapairt O'Conasa says
Charles could not have a multi faith ceremony anyhow , for he would not be blessed under the one true God . Although his intentions are good ,they are some what misguided . Allah’s old name is Hilal bin Sahar or Hilal Sahar . Hilal like halal it’s derivative means brightness and also crescent moon , bin Sahar means son of the morning ,the morning star from the saharon the stars as in the sahara desert of stars . the symbol of the crescent moon and stars iis allah and islam but also in past pagan empires too ; Babylon Baal and Asteroth , Egypt Osiris and Isis , Assyrian Bel and Belit , Greek Helios and Artemis and Roman Apollo and Diana . All crescent and moon worship , Hilal Sahar is also Arabic for the Latin Lucifer ( hilal sahar ) Isaiah 14:12,” How thou art fallen Oh Lucifer! son of the Dawn ,Oh morning star hath been cast down and decieved the nations !”. Allahu Akhbar does not mean God is Great as depicted by media and others . Akhbar means greater than . If he was the one true God there’s no need to prove it ” thou shalt not tempt the lord thy God !”..therefore allahu akhbar literally means Lucifer is greater than …who ?.
Hoi Polloi says
He wants “to better reflect the modern monarchy,” by reverting to the 7th century. No one ever praised his intellect or high standards. It seems that’s with good reason.
gravenimage says
+1
Linde B. says
King Charles seems like he wants to fit in with the WOKEISTS. Very sad. Not good.
John Allan says
We’ve LONG left the Middle Ages!
Charlie Boy needs to recognise, that his position is reliant on our ‘passive’ acceptance!
Push his luck … and it will very likely push back!
And bite him on the royal a_se!
John Allan says
‘The Express points out that “while Charles will remain the Defender of the Faith …’
Quite frankly, I wouldn’t trust Charlie Boy to defend the metaphorical brewery p_ss-up.
And it seems my LACK of Faith is being proven justified.
Keith O says
As far as I’m concerned, Chuckles and his skank Camel toe shouldn’t be anywhere near the throne.
He should have stepped aside and let his son William become king. Even Harry would make a better monarch than that bastard.
James Lincoln says
Has anyone ever asked King Charles what religion he identifies with?
Rufolino says
Good question ! But he can’t answer this question in public because a section of the public will automatically be left out, and he can’t leave people out, can he ? Another lesson in how “diversity” is not strength…
Goofy says
The King is the head of the Anglican Church
It believes that our Lord and Saviour is “the way, the truth and the life, and nobody comes to the Father except through me”.
That means that the King must be a believer himself and how anachronistic it may sound Christianity knows of no religious relativism.
Islam, however, depends on relativism to be considered a religion at all. It is nothing without Abraham with whom it cannot prove any connection.
Islam has high respect for Virgin Mary but the virgin birth makes no sense as her son Isa is a run of the mill prophet, junior in rank to Muhammad. Islam strips Isa from all which makes Jesus Christ the Lord and Saviour for all who believe in him. He is the righteousness of all his Christian believers whilst the Muslims must fight for their own righteousness, which by definition makes them self-righteous.
The Christian command of “Love your enemy” is contrasted by Islam’s command of striking the unbelievers’ necks. The multicultural ideal thus fits the Christian gospel but it makes no sense in an Islamic context.
So King Charles, stick to your being a Christian and head of the Anglican church.
That is the only inclusiveness you will ever achieve!.
To have an Imam chanting in the church to Allah his praise and thanksgiving that he is neither a Christian nor a Jew doesn’t contribute to anything but blaspheming Christ and insulting those who follow him.
King Charles, please grow up and reconsider.:
Barbara says
An all-inclusive reign, does that mean Catholics can now ascend to the throne? Before Henry VIII Catholics were the royal family.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
The King/Queen is the head of the Church of England. If a Catholic became the ruler, wouldn’t that make the Anglican Church disappear? It would be like a muslim becoming the pope
dunce says
The pope tried to interfere with throne succession and caused that schism generations ago making the king head of the church of England.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Looks like Barbados dodged a bullet when it decided to become a republic. Other members of the ‘realm’ outside the UK might like to follow suit. Although given how woke some of these countries are in their own right – Australia, Canada, New Zealand…, maybe they have exactly the ruler who’s in tune w/ them
Deborah Pitt says
The Church of England is not known for its stalwartness to the faith of the Reformation these days but I pray to God that the Archbishop of Canterbury resists strongly King Charles’ ideas. We must not capitulate to the sentiments of multiculturalism and inclusivity that befuddle the U.K’s national and historic identity. To send such a message to Islamic citizens is especially dangerous for our future.
The country is already destabilising under the tyranny of Woke and other unChristian ideas that are divisive and undermine the traditions, values, dignity, and discipline that define a stable country. That KIng Charles is so ignorant of or blind to the historical importance of the Church of England, Canon Law and the accession Constitution is cause for dismay and grave concern. We remove such ancient boundary stones at our peril. Is King Charles even a patriot??
gravenimage says
UK: King Charles clashes with Church of England over ‘inclusive’ coronation, ‘commitment to multiple religions’
……………………………………
Charles said before he became king that he didn’t want to be “Defender of the Faith” but “defender of faith”–mostly meaning Islam. So none of this should surprise. Just hope there is backlash from the C of E and ordinary Britons.