The Coronation was fairly spectacular but made me think of a masonic ritual. The ritual failed in its symbolism because it did not point to a greater reality as all symbols must do to have any value. It rejected the One, True, Catholic and Apostolic Faith. It did not keep His Word and therefore rejected Jesus. Like Edmund Campion March 10th, 1615 at the age of 36, another Jesuit, St John Ogilvie was martyred according to the penalty of his time. His last words were, “If there be here, any hidden Catholics, let them pray for me but the prayers of the heretics I will not have”. I looked at the Coronation participants and onlookers and thought most of them are heretics. The communion service and female bishops were especially repulsive along with the repeated allegiance to the Protestant faith in the oath of succession taken by the new king. In total contrast to St Thomas More, “The king’s good servant, but God’s first,” the whole thing was counterfeit to the true faith, a denial and betrayal of Catholic England, the Dowry of Mary. May God's grace convert them in the Warning and Miracle of Garabandal.
The chapel near the summit of Cruach Phádraig where St Patrick fasted for 40 days. Now there is the true Faith. My wee sister and her husband climbed this yesterday and sent the photo.
As someone who has been waiting for the warning since the 1990s seems like it is never going to come.
The trick is to live each moment united to Jesus and Mary and begging mercy for poor sinners. The warning will come when it will come. At least thats what I tell myself. I am counting on a conscience correction as Maria Esperanza called it, to wake up my loved ones. Hardness of heart is an epidemic these days.
Naomi Wolfe has a very interesting post about the "weird things" in the coronation. I don't agree with what she says about the physical tabernacle no longer being necessary to hold the Presence of God (she is not Catholic) but the other stuff is interesting. She mentions the symbolism included from outside the Church of England, including from the Catholic Church. I didn't watch the event so am reading opinions about it. Apparently the annointing was done behind a screen and the words were not audible which does not seem right as it's secretive. https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/weird-things-about-king-charles-coronation
Hang on you guys… It’s clear that many non-British people have no clue how we see things. Cdl Nicholls was quite right to bless the new King. Charles is our king too. Catholics are over represented in our armed forces and one of our boarding schools, I think Stonyhurst, has the highest number of VC’s awarded to past pupils. We are a loyal lot mostly. Charles was not ‘chosen’ over William for any reason. He inherits the throne from his late mother. That’s how primogeniture works. I wouldn’t hold too much hope concerning William. He’s almost certainly signed up to the same globalist principles and he’s entirely secular, married to a secular wife. An aristocratic wife (which she is not) would at least have been brought up with the concept of serving the less well off. Their children are cute. The dreadful Protestant promises of the coronation rubric are traditional but outdated. I’m sure Charles would rather have not made them but as head of the Church of England they are imposed on him. It’s believed he has more affinity spiritually with the Orthodox and he has stayed at Mount Athos a number of times. I think he has been searching all his life. Let’s pray for him as he is a person of good will. Anne is right that in Britain Catholics have been regarded with suspicion and dislike but this attitude is very rare today. I think Padraig sees a lot more of this in Northern Ireland. I read a while ago that there are more practising Catholics in England than Anglicans, largely due to immigration. In any case the C of E would seem to be possessed of a woke death wish. Like many of my countrymen I watched the coronation with friends. I wore my Union Jack skirt and a coronation t shirt. We ate coronation chicken and drank English wine - ‘methode champenoise’ to toast the king. He’s not perfect but he’s ours. If it sounds a bit muddled it is because it is. St Margaret Clitherow and St Anne Line pray for us and the conversion of England.
At Mass yesterday, the lectern bore a picture of the king with 2 Union Jacks. I always understood that Catholic churches were not permitted to display national flags which I approve as we are not a national church but the one and only universal one. At the end of Mass, the official Catholic prayer for the King was recited and then a chorus of 'God Save the King' which was sung enthusiastically by maybe a third of the congregation. I really don't believe that any of this was appropriate. Even if the King were a committed member of the Church of which he is 'head', he would merely be a heretic occupying a usurped throne. I did attend a celebration but Coronation Day was also my younger son's birthday and so I had no qualms about attending a party that he hosted as a joint celebration. I regard the King as a 'decent chap' but totally misguided and muddled, his 'spirituality' appears to be an acceptance that all faiths are of equal worth and I would not regard him or his beliefs as remotely Christian.
Agree. With all the beauty and excitement of a coronation, we can’t forget, they are Protestants. And it’s Protestantism that is winning in this mad world, unfortunately. Praying for that Warning to come soon!
I also thought that screen was very odd, looked like a makeshift dressing room. I does make you wonder why the anointing cannot be seen, what did they have to hide.
I am prepared to accept that I may have been too harsh on Cardinal Nichols. The future Pope Pius XII was at the coronation of George V.
Charles will be our Perennialist King He will protect the realm from modernity Esmé Partridge is a writer who works at the intersection of faith, politics and civil society. September 19, 2022 King Charles III has often been accused of heresy. As the Prince of Wales, his early support of environmental activism and his (tenuous) involvement in the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset marked him out as a dissenter who might break from the ways of previous monarchs. Even more controversial were his views on religion. Back in 1994, Charles suggested that when king, he might become Defender of Faith, instead of Defender of The Faith, the title given to him as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. There was a storm of criticism, and some years after, he clarified what he meant: he would keep the royal title while also protecting other faiths. His openness to those faiths — especially Islam — did lead many to question his commitment to the Church. On the surface, at least, he seems to veer towards syncretism or even a covert form of secularism; an appeal to a multicultural Britain no longer willing to assert Christianity as the one true faith. Like what you’re reading?Get the free UnHerd daily email Sign in But the story is more complex. Charles — who might just be Britain’s modern-day philosopher king — has long been affiliated with Perennialism, a school of thought which holds that there is one universal truth which is present, to varying degrees, within all traditional religions. As the patron of the Temenos Academy, an educational charity dedicated to the study of Perennialism, Charles has done more to cultivate this philosophy than any other modern thinker. Unconventional as that philosophy might sound, it is one fit for a hereditary monarch: its purpose being not to subvert tradition, but to revive it. Charles has expressed particular sympathy with the Traditionalist School, a branch of Perennialism. Led by the French philosopher René Guénon, the Swiss metaphysician Frithjof Schuon, and the Ceylonese philosopher Ananda Coomaraswamy, the Traditionalists emerged in the 19th century in reaction to the materialist ideologies of the Enlightenment. Its proponents believed that modernity had left humanity bereft of its spiritual dimension, and thought that this could be remedied by the metaphysical teachings contained within traditional religions. For Guénon, pre-modern civilisations had oriented themselves “vertically” towards transcendence, with every aspect of life, from politics to art, corresponding to the order of the cosmos and the nature of God. But with the proliferation of “profane philosophy”, the dimensions of existence had become purely horizontal, extending only to things of this world. The result is what he famously called “The Reign of Quantity”, in which all human activity is rationalistic and utilitarian, focused on material progress rather than man’s ascension toward the divine. Charles, who has himself invoked the concept of The Reign of Quantity, also seems to lament a world which no longer reaches for God. He has devoted himself not only to the reconsecration of nature, as is evident in his environmentalism, but also the reconsecration of art. In promoting the mastery of traditional crafts through the Prince’s Foundation School of Traditional Arts, he echoes Guénon’s view that creativity should not be a mode of mere self-expression, but a vessel of transcendence. The students at his school “can experience the beauty of the order of nature — a spiritual, sacred beauty, connecting the whole of creation”.
Protecting hedgerows, trees and ancient crafts is all very well. Where Charles’s philosophy becomes controversial is in the fact that he, like Guénon, is willing to draw inspiration from the religions of both East and West. His suggestion that Islam “can teach us today a way of understanding and living in the world which Christianity itself is the poorer for having lost”, for instance, appears to reflect the Perennialist position that it is possible to illuminate one’s own tradition with the light of others, for nestled within all of them is the same universal truth. Does this suggest that Perennialism, if allowed to flourish, would one day lead to the merging of all the world’s belief systems into one? Those sceptical of Charles’s openness towards other faiths fear precisely that: a “one world religion”. In our postmodern age, it is not hard to envision a world which has dissolved all particularities to make way for an ideological monoculture. One hundred years ago, G. K. Chesterton imagined what the beginnings of such a world might look like. His novel The Flying Inn is set in a future England where the elites, romantically inclined towards the idea of a universal religion and politically motivated to unite East and West, embrace a strange, progressive form of Islam which they see to be less superstitious than Christianity. The end result is something that resembles neither traditional Islam nor Christianity, but a ghastly syncretism which destroys the country’s identity (and its pubs). SUGGESTED READING Who can rule Britain now? BY MARY HARRINGTON But Chesterton’s dystopian England is not what the Perennialists had in mind. In fact, they were more critical than anyone of syncretism — with Guénon writing sharp polemics against New Age spirituality and its subversion of tradition — and would certainly have feared the coming of a “one world religion”. They emphasised the need to be firmly rooted in one faith in order to attain spiritual insight, and were highly critical of the homogenisation of cultures promoted by a globalising, secularising world. This, Guénon believed, caused the “flattening” of knowledge and ultimately sealed off higher truths. We can rest assured that Charles has no intention of subverting Christianity. But he does believe, in the spirit of Perennialism, that glimmers of its light can be discerned elsewhere — perhaps in places less dimmed by modernity. That’s why he may draw inspiration from Islamic or Dharmic thought, and yet still remain the steadfast defender of the Christian faith. Admittedly, Charles’s attitude to defending that faith is somewhat unorthodox. But in the 21st century, where there is no choice but to accept religious pluralism, it might be the only way to go about it. Perennialism has the virtue of being able to welcome multiple faiths, while also maintaining a conception of absolute truth. Whereas other leaders might surrender their truth in the name of inclusivity — instead allowing each religious group to have its “own truth” in true postmodern fashion — Charles’s philosophy allows for religious difference without slipping into relativism and the eventual abandonment of the sacred. The path from pluralism to relativism is all too easily taken. When Nietzsche remarked that “there are various eyes… and as a result there are various truths, and as a result there is no truth”, he foreshadowed the postmodern response to pluralism that ends in the denial of objectivity. Today, this takes the form of states privatising religion and reducing it to an aspect of cultural diversity rather than a source of insight that could benefit us all. Likewise, when identity politics calls to “represent” religion, it too often reduces it to a point of intersectionality on par with race and class rather than something which points to a shared eternal truth. But Charles, our philosopher king, is a firm believer in eternal truth. He is able to respond to pluralism in such a way that results in neither syncretism nor secularism. Instead, his philosophy allows religious difference to go beyond the secular paradigm of inclusion and reintroduce a much-needed spiritual dimension to public life — for everyone. He is, of course, in the best position to do so. The symbolic function of monarchy is to point to something higher; to be the “vertical” axis which reaches for transcendence above “horizontal” reality with all its diversity and conflict. Perhaps his reign might strive to overcome The Reign of Quantity in this way, made all the more possible by the fact that his kingship allows him to respond to modernity from a station that is not political, but spiritual. While some seek to tear the modern world down in a way that is distinctly post-modern, Charles — in returning to the primordial foundations of existence — represents something pre-modern. Far from betraying tradition, King Charles III might just save it. https://unherd.com/2022/09/charles-will-be-our-perennialist-king/
