ONE LITTLE WORD
Sometimes the quiet whisper changing a world slips in with little fanfare. Amongst the pageantry and recent ill-conceived American commentary against a new King many believed would not be up to it, with one little word King Charles III almost changed the history of the Crown and redefined its and Wests future. In an earlier speech on the 13 November in 2008, then Prince Charles professed he will become the "defender of faith", no longer of “the” faith.
In that little word “the” he could have achieved two monumental changes. Where statistics show belief in organised Christianity is on the wane [in the UK one third of population identify as non-Christian and Muslims double the number of Christians] due to the emergence of science disputing talking snakes, virgin births and flying donkeys, Charles would then no longer have to say he will defend the inventions of Christianity his beloved mother upheld and which were OK for the old dear of 96 but now regarded differently by a generation which can Google to find where the Bible is little better than a good story even if used to cement progress over centuries. His Royal Highness could have said the Bible’s message was fittingly allegorical and provided comfort for the dying in that a wonderful heaven awaited, recognising all three monotheistic religions had the same God only different worshiping rules and hence could now stop fighting each other. By simply defending all faiths he would have thereby finally separated religion from government. This becomes a massive change in removing any antagonism between Christianity as the Religion of the West against other religions from elsewhere. It is saying, you can believe in anything you like, and this no longer matters, we no longer demand this has to be Christianity – nor in fact Anglican or Protestant or Roman Catholic. We are one.
Thinking along these lines for a moment, the ramifications become enormous. Firstly, it makes the organised religious dominance irrelevant in enforcing any of their policy issues and should lead to removing any tax advantages in the separation from government. There should be no more swearing on the Bible in which one is attesting to belief in the impossible stories meaning also that various connecting aspects of law would still need to be reviewed.
Take this further and one sees that with the rise on Muslim populations in England, the change means the removal of dominance by the Monarchy of one religion over the other, on the one hand removing conflict while on the other, it does remove the enshrined dominance of Christianity with its own if irrational consequences. It is a now a vastly different world and population mix from when Queen Elizabeth came to power.
Which also raises the question of transition to republicanism abandoning the Royal mantra if the Crown no longer intends to defend one’s own enshrined religion, where after all this has long been a basis of its mandate after freeing itself from Catholicism. Good if Charlie would defend our right to believe in what we like but don’t we have the right now anyway? Such a small word, the. That's the good news.
Unfortunately the UK is still under the power of the talking snakes and virgin births even if since 1532 it is no longer technically under the control of the Pope. The population and belief mix is now so interconnected it is possible to see that a division in faiths cannot hold everyone together so it would be better to cement further separation between faith and state which could have been achieved by insertion of one little word. Charlie however did not have the cajons to pull off his earlier preference and after finally winning the top job after his mother, on the 9th September this year, he quickly reversed his earlier beliefs and it is back to "defender of the faith" [Anglican Faith except when he becomes Protestant when he visits Wales - go figure]. Well, "the" idea was a step forward towards truth while it lasted but then again talk is cheap...
