Koran Should be Read at Prince Charles' Coronation says Top Bishop

originally posted by: Thurisaz
a reply to: Jainine

People are assuming a lot.

The Queen is still alive. Charles 'could' inherit the crown...or it could 'bypass' him and William could be the successor.

seems a bit far fetched to consider the Church of England would even consider the Quran.

Sadly the idea of Brenda handing the crown over to William is just speculation. Charlie has been waiting to be king for a very long time now and he'll never agree to be passed over. Besides, there's no precedent for it, and in this case precedent is all. No, he'll be king and whoever is PM at the time will have to slap him down. He'll be told to stop writing to ministers and that government policy is the exclusive province of Parliament. He cannot interfere with Parliament, even if he has the very best of intentions.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

yes your correct...but what if he dies of a heart attack? then William will be next in line ...

If I can get a word in...

The monarch is also has the title "Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England". If the Church of England did not break from the Catholic Church all those centuries ago then the monarch would just be a Catholic. How boring would that be?

There are two sides to this. Firstly, the monarch has a formal role as the head of the CoE and this needs to be captured and demonstrated in any coronation. However, there should be recognition that the monarch will reign over the UK and the Commonwealth within which there are a multiplicity of religions, because as was pointed out earlier, the British Empire did not go out to convert everyone unlike (ahem) the Spanish or Portuguese!

I would be comfortable that different religions are represented at the monarchs coronation, but deeply uncomfortable if these were seen as equal to the monarchs role as the head of the CoE. This would reflect the nature of the UK and Commonwealth. A Jedi in the invitations would be a coup.

Regards

originally posted by: paraphi
If I can get a word in...

so funny



LOL

originally posted by: Thurisaz
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

yes your correct...but what if he dies of a heart attack? then William will be next in line ...

Oh yes, if Charlie gets hit by a bus tomorrow then that will solve a large number of problems and William will be next in line.

a reply to: paraphi


Does that mean Dafydd Iwan will be singing Yma O Hyd?

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: paraphi


Does that mean Dafydd Iwan will be singing Yma O Hyd?

We can but hope! And if Charlie wants an all-inclusive multifaith service then we also need some pagans who can sacrifice some broccoli perhaps?

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Well I am thinking tribal here. No need for kissing the Korans arse at this point its really so far back in line. Besides we should know that kissing the Koran is really kissing the Saudis arse and some others. Cant really separate the faiths from their people which is really what this is all about. Tribal politics.

a reply to: Logarock

It's also about Charlie being his idiotic self. He can't leave well enough alone, he's always got to meddle - and he keeps screwing up massively. He's had decades to think about what kind of king he'll be, which is to totally misunderstand what the modern British monarchy is. It's an illusion. The monarch has no power, they are just a figurehead. Charlie will be told to sit on the throne and look decorative. That's it. But Charlie wants to be a king for the whole country, plus he keeps wittering on about rural affairs, town planning and anything else that occurs to him. If he continues the latter then the PM will tell him to be silent. If he wants to do the former then fair enough, but there's a chance that he will offend someone in the process, making things worse.

a reply to: Logarock

No guilt here.

Just inclusion.

You guys should try it sometime instead of going in all guns blazing, huh?

Hmm I wonder which of the Koranic verses should be quoted?

Maybe one of the 109 verses inciting violence against non-muslims:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority".

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."

Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes.

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Or perhaps one of the quotes such as "Hell is full of women", that a woman is worth only half a man or the ones promoting pedophillia...?

Hmm I wonder which of the Koranic verses should be quoted?

Maybe one of the 109 verses inciting violence against non-muslims:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority".

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."

Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes.

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Or perhaps one of the quotes such as "Hell is full of women", that a woman is worth only half a man or the ones promoting pedophillia...?

originally posted by: neformore
a reply to: Logarock

No guilt here.

Just inclusion.

You guys should try it sometime instead of going in all guns blazing, huh?

Perhaps you should try actually reading the Koran instead of blindly defending it

and then tell me how inclusive IT is.

No guilt here. I've actually read it and am not ignorant as to the hatespeech it contains.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

well then i hues the muslim people need to gather togther and put them isis members in their place because isnt that what they are doing convert or die

originally posted by: Jainine
This story covers religion, politics, and a royal family. A trifecta!

UK - Koran Should be Read at Prince Charles' Coronation says Top Bishop

Prince Charles’s coronation service should be opened with a reading from the Koran, a senior Church of England bishop said yesterday.
The gesture would be a ‘creative act of accommodation’ to make Muslims feel ‘embraced’ by the nation, Lord Harries of Pentregarth said.

But critics attacked the idea, accusing the Church of ‘losing confidence’ in its own institutions and traditions. Lord Harries, a former Bishop of Oxford and a leading CofE liberal thinker, said he was sure Charles’s coronation would give scope to leaders of non-Christian religions to give their blessing to the new King.

Isn't the King of England supposed to be the Head of the Church of England? I'm not sure I understand why would the head of a religion (any religion) would want to have passages read from a religious book that they don't believe in. In the past, Prince Charles has said that he wants to be known as 'Defender of Faith' instead of the traditional 'Defender of THE Faith'. And he has said that he felt the Catholic, Islamic, Hindu and Zoroastrian subjects are just as important as the Protestant ones. I suppose if he goes for the suggestion, this would be a part of that outreach. I'm wondering how British citizens will feel about it.

Does it even matter anymore who is the King or Queen of England? Do they have any real power? Is the symbolic that important? I know they are a tourist attraction and part of British tradition, but it looks like the tradition part is starting to get watered down. With the watering down, the tourist attraction part goes away. Should Charles even be crowned? Would the Queen pass Charles by and go straight to William? Could England stand having a Queen Camilla?

Is the call for reading the Koran at the next coronation a nod to a more diverse British population, or is it appeasement in the tradition of Chamberlain? Would Islamic governments and entities see it as a positive gesture or would they see it as their religion gaining a foothold in Britain and this would further their own global goals?

More questions than answers.
But it's an interesting topic to discuss.

Well stated, that last paragraph has some key points that I wouldn't even want to postulate. The outcome could be catastrophic to British rhetoric.

a reply to: Kalixi

I don't care how inclusive you perceive it to be, or not.

For the record though, I haven't "defended" anything - maybe you should re-read what I've written and try and comprehend it.

I've read what you've written, and you appear to hate muslims. . If you are incapable of separating the actions of a minority of extremists from the many then thats your problem to deal with, not mine.

I come from a country that is measured, and inclusive and thoughtful and obviously has a different culture than you can possibly imagine, and you know what, I'm glad I do.

So thanks for your considered opinion, but no thanks.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Logarock

It's also about Charlie being his idiotic self. He can't leave well enough alone, he's always got to meddle - and he keeps screwing up massively. He's had decades to think about what kind of king he'll be, which is to totally misunderstand what the modern British monarchy is. It's an illusion. The monarch has no power, they are just a figurehead. Charlie will be told to sit on the throne and look decorative. That's it. But Charlie wants to be a king for the whole country, plus he keeps wittering on about rural affairs, town planning and anything else that occurs to him. If he continues the latter then the PM will tell him to be silent. If he wants to do the former then fair enough, but there's a chance that he will offend someone in the process, making things worse.

I previously listed some of the powers of the monarch and they're significant. Whether the monarch chooses to exercise those powers is another matter. As the Duke of Cornwall, I believe he has a right to express his opinion regarding things that affect the Duchy. As the monarch, he will be expected to advise his government. I'm not sure, but as the Prince of Wales, he may have that right now (or at least it may not be prohibited).

Yes, he has expressed his opinion about a number of matters. Would you prefer that he spend his time like his uncle did, partying and chasing women? I actually think Prince Charles has done a very good job with his considerable charities. Compare him to any other public figure who has been on the public stage and under the microscope for 65+ years and tell me how he ranks. Compare his faux pas to your own over a lifetime.

I have a feeling that if he didn't say a word about anything, he'd be criticized for that, too. He's in a no-win situation and making the best of it. His comments, whether you agree with them or not, have been intended for the good of the people and are not self-serving. Give him credit for that.

Thought I'd throw this one into the mix;

British Royal Family descended from bloodline of Mohammed

A connection from Muhammad,[11] entering the British line through Infanta Isabella of Castile (shown in the first chart), has been endorsed by Burke's Peerage

Wiki

originally posted by: f4andHALFtoads
Thought I'd throw this one into the mix;

British Royal Family descended from bloodline of Mohammed

A connection from Muhammad,[11] entering the British line through Infanta Isabella of Castile (shown in the first chart), has been endorsed by Burke's Peerage

Wiki

If we were all able to trace our bloodlines as thoroughly as the royals, most of us would probably be related to him, too. Of course, all it takes for a geneological line to be fiction is for one woman to have a child by a man not her husband. It would seem a near certainty that, over centuries, that has happened in most family lines. That's why DNA tests produce surprising results.