Thread: Eccles: This is the thread where we talk about coronations Board: Limbo / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000754
Posted by Bran Stark (# 15252) on
:
...which really are religious ceremonies.
Elizabeth II is sadly not immortal, and in a few years or decades we'll hear "The Queen is dead. Long live the King!" Whether it's Charles III/George VII or William V, and assuming the monarchy's still around when the time comes, how will the crowning be? The classic Anglican way? Or a multifaith madhouse with the Chief Rabbi, the Chief Imam, and Richard Dawkins all in attendance?
Moving beyond Britain, are there any Christian monarchies that still hold actual coronations? I know a few years ago the Tongan king was crowned, by an Anglican bishop from New Zealand, using pretty much the Westminster Abbey order of service.
[Edited title.]
[ 04. June 2010, 22:52: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Bran Stark:
Moving beyond Britain, are there any Christian monarchies that still hold actual coronations?
Yes, Norway. It occurs in Nidaros Cathedral, Trondheim, where St. Olaf is buried. From the article linked, here follow's Martin's paraphrase of the liturgy:
quote:
In Nidaros Cathedral the Royal Couple was met by the bishop of Nidaros, Finn Wagle, and Oslo's bishop Andreas Aarflot. Bishop Wagle greeted the King with the words: "God protect your going out and your coming in from this time forth and forevermore.
The procession made its way into the church, and King and Queen took their places at the royal stools from 1818. After the readings and sermon the king walked forward.
The King knelt before the high altar. Bishop Wagle laid his hands on the King's head, and led the coronation prayer...
Then the Queen walked foward and knelt at the king's side. With hands on the Queen's head the bishop led this prayer...
The bishop read then this blessing over the King and Queen...
Then the King and Queen were escorted back to the royal stools.
Apologies, but I have to go for now. If I think of it some other time, I can translate the prayers. I think...
As for British coronations, IIRC Prince Charles prefers the stately language of the Prayer Book to the contemporary words of Common Worship. I would expect a traditional coronation. I'm not sure how he would feel about Communion being a part of it, but I don't imagine much of a change from what the current Queen did.
[ 15. March 2010, 00:30: Message edited by: Martin L ]
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Don't forget that Elizabeth II (for whom we prayed in our Lenten Litany) is the Queen of substantially more than the UK - some 15 or more other countries from memory, probably at least as Christian as is the UK.
Posted by Bran Stark (# 15252) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Don't forget that Elizabeth II (for whom we prayed in our Lenten Litany) is the Queen of substantially more than the UK - some 15 or more other countries from memory, probably at least as Christian as is the UK.
Very true, but they're hardy gonna have separate ceremonies in a dozen realms.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
And why not? She is Queen of Australia and her other realms and territories. The formula elswwhere must be along the same lines. There's the rain shelter (bit on the small side) in Sydney, but Brisbane is recently completed, and Melboure's a good venue. Adelaide is close to the cricket ground, so the new monarch could get annointed, then go and watch a game. I don't know Perth.
There's absolutely no reason why the ceremony has to be at Westminster Abbey, to the exclusion of the other monarchies.
Posted by Bran Stark (# 15252) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
And why not? She is Queen of Australia and her other realms and territories. The formula elswwhere must be along the same lines. There's the rain shelter (bit on the small side) in Sydney, but Brisbane is recently completed, and Melboure's a good venue. Adelaide is close to the cricket ground, so the new monarch could get annointed, then go and watch a game. I don't know Perth.
There's absolutely no reason why the ceremony has to be at Westminster Abbey, to the exclusion of the other monarchies.
That's true (save for a thousand years of tradition), but wherever it might be, there can only be one coronation.
Posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known (# 11399) on
:
Coronations are a rarity in our day and age. Some of the older monarchies have since opted for the simpler (and more severe-looking) accession ceremony where they take their oaths and just that. No pomp and pageantry and robes.
The rite at Nidaros is an anointing rite, I reckon.
Juan Carlos took his oath with the crown present but not worn. Some monarchies don't have an actual crown, too.
I suppose that the future coronation of HMtQ's successor will be reflective of the current make-up of the Commonwealth, although it will still be an English affair by all accounts.
Perhaps the Chief Rabbi will intone the OT lesson in Hebrew... or that the whole affair will slightly resemble Barack Obama's Inauguration Service at WNC.
Still, there will be a crown.
---
Having gone over the available text of the Queen's coronation, I am wondering why Communion was restricted to a few participants? Then again, was it customary to NOT have Communion at Coronation services at all...?
Posted by Wayward Crucifer (# 152) on
:
Communion, so far as I am aware, has always* been a part of the the English** (later British) Coronation, with the exception of James VII/II.
It has also been restricted to that "very few" for most if not all of that time.
Wayward
*Unless the Hanoverians couldn't be bothered, of course
**I can't speak for the Scots, as I have absolutely no idea
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Bran Stark , there can only be the one coronation in the one State. Think of Austria-Hungary - a coronation as Emperor, then a trip to Budapest to be crowned King. Think of James VI/I - crowned in both Scotland, and then England. From memory, all others were crowned in both London and Edinburgh until the Act of Union, which created the United Kingdom as one State.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Mea culpa - the Act of Union created Great Britain; the United Kingdom came a century later, with the abolition of the separate Irish Crown. The point remains correct though. A single person can well be monarch of several independent countries/States, and crowned in each.
Posted by Pre-cambrian (# 2055) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Wayward Crucifer:
Communion, so far as I am aware, has always* been a part of the the English** (later British) Coronation, with the exception of James VII/II.
In principle it's actually the other way round, in that the coronation takes place within the context of a mass/communion service. I suspect James VII/II was the sole exception and that was due to religious differences, and even then there may have been an Anglican communion service which he, as a Roman Catholic, did not participate in.
There has been talk about a future coronation being more multicultural, but what I would hope is that the coronation would proceed unchanged with a completely separate multicultural festivity if that were felt desirable. The coronation is already very lengthy so a combined event could only be achieved by deleting many of the traditional features of the rite.
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on
:
As chance would have it, I was reading about the constitution of the oil used for anointing the British sovereign only t'other day ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
The 'recipe' is stored at Westminster Abbey and dates from the time of [Bl] Charles I - it is a special mix of fragrances including oils of rose, jasmine and cinnamon with a little musk, civet and ambergris, and is placed on the monarchs heart, head, shoulders and hands.
Queen Victoria didn't like it - and personally I think it sounds like a right tart's boudoir but hey... it's Tradition!
Posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known (# 11399) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:
As chance would have it, I was reading about the constitution of the oil used for anointing the British sovereign only t'other day
The 'recipe' is stored at Westminster Abbey and dates from the time of [Bl] Charles I - it is a special mix of fragrances including oils of rose, jasmine and cinnamon with a little musk, civet and ambergris, and is placed on the monarchs heart, head, shoulders and hands.
Queen Victoria didn't like it - and personally I think it sounds like a right tart's boudoir but hey... it's Tradition!
I thought the recipe was more or less based on the Biblical one?
Will there be incense in future UK coronations?
Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Think of Austria-Hungary - a coronation as Emperor, then a trip to Budapest to be crowned King.
I don't think Austria had a coronation. In Hungary, Blessed Karl had to wear the crown while riding a horse up a steep mound!
I would love to see a modern day coronation in Vienna. Otto is getting on in years so they'd better hurry up!
Posted by Pre-cambrian (# 2055) on
:
There had previously been coronations for the Holy Roman Emperors (for centuries at Aachen and then more recently at Frankfurt-am-Main), but when Francis II made himself Emperor of Austria as well in 1804 preparatory to abolishing the HRE he didn't add another coronation ceremony and that remained the case as long as the Austrian Empire lasted. I suspect that there has never been a coronation in Vienna.
Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by dj_ordinaire on the subject of the anointing oil:
Queen Victoria didn't like it
Bit too 'igh Church for the Coburgs.
Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on
:
I think that from the time of James VI in Scotland,only Charles II was crowned at Scone.(And he was not recognized as king in England at that time,during the time of Cromwell !)
The National church of Scotland has no coronation ceremony and for well over 100 years after the political Union of Scotland and England the crown of Scotland was hidden away,even lost ,some would say.
Queen Elizabeth came to Scotland after her coronation in London in 1953 and was present at a ceremony in the high Kirk of St Giles where she was shown,perhaps even presented with ,the crown.Her robes on that day were coat,hat and hand-bag.
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
there can only be the one coronation in the one State. Think of Austria-Hungary - a coronation as Emperor, then a trip to Budapest to be crowned King. Think of James VI/I - crowned in both Scotland, and then England. From memory, all others were crowned in both London and Edinburgh until the Act of Union, which created the United Kingdom as one State.
Wasn't George V also crowned as Emperor of India at a Durbah in Delhi?
Posted by Freddy R (# 14391) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
And why not? She is Queen of Australia and her other realms and territories. The formula elswwhere must be along the same lines. There's the rain shelter (bit on the small side) in Sydney, but Brisbane is recently completed, and Melboure's a good venue. Adelaide is close to the cricket ground, so the new monarch could get annointed, then go and watch a game. I don't know Perth.
There's absolutely no reason why the ceremony has to be at Westminster Abbey, to the exclusion of the other monarchies.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Thank you DavidDrinkell, I'm pretty sure you're right. The point is that the UK monarch is also the monarch of quite a few independent States. I don't have any reference books handy (at work), but the early Hanoverians, if not all until William IV, were crowned in London and Hanover - independent States sharing a monarch.
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pre-cambrian:
... when Francis II made himself Emperor of Austria as well in 1804 preparatory to abolishing the HRE he didn't add another coronation ceremony and that remained the case as long as the Austrian Empire lasted. I suspect that there has never been a coronation in Vienna.
There wasn't much opportunity for one. He was already Holy Roman Emperor and king of at least three separate countries so another coronation would have looked self-indulgent. Then there was Ferdinand for a bit (no idea if he had a coronation or if not why not) then it was old Franz Joseph all the way down till the goats fell off the mountain. His reign started and ended in the middle of rather bloody wars (going on seventy years apart). When he went they had other things on their mind, and the last one never really got his foot over the door. For most of his short and mostly non-reigning reign Vienna was being run by a more-or-less Communist city council and a public coronation might have been thought somewhat provocative
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy R:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
There's absolutely no reason why the ceremony has to be at Westminster Abbey, to the exclusion of the other monarchies.
I'm sure we'd be only too happy to accommodate. After all, Newfoundland is the oldest colony, St. John's is the oldest city in North America and the Anglican Cathedral is the oldest parish in Canada.
Plus we use the Book of Common Prayer - I'm sure His Potential Majesty would be keen on that.... ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Posted by NatDogg (# 14347) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by daviddrinkell:
Wasn't George V also crowned as Emperor of India at a Durbah in Delhi?
At the Durbar in Delhi in 1911, George V wasn't crowned per se. He arrived (along with Queen Mary) already crowned with the newly-made Imperial Crown of India; the British Crown Jewels couldn't be taken out of the realm. He was formally proclaimed Emperor, recieved homage of the Indian nobles, princes, and other potentates, and greeted his new subject. So in many ways the event was similar to the British ceremony at Westminster, but without an actual crowning.
Apparently there were Durbars in 1877 for Victoria and 1903 for Edward VII, but the 1911 event was the only attended by the Emperor/Empress him/herself. It looks like it was a fascinating event.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
David:
It's just you aren't the Established Religion. We don't have one in Canada. You aren't even the largest church either.
Metropolitan United in Toronto is always available, and suitably large.... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
David:
It's just you aren't the Established Religion. We don't have one in Canada. You aren't even the largest church either.
Metropolitan United in Toronto is always available, and suitably large....
Damn! I knew there was a flaw in it somewhere!
Metropolitan certainly has the organ for it - a wonderful beast - but could you trust the carilloneur not to play something naughty at the wrong time?
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
David:
It's just you aren't the Established Religion. We don't have one in Canada. You aren't even the largest church either.
Sorry, it's me again....I've just thought.... one reason a lot of Newfoundlanders were not wild about Confederation was that they would have to stop being Church of England and join the Anglican Church of Canada, which was not only unEstablished but rather tastelessly Low as well (they may not have known about SMMT). If you listen to people talking, it seems they're still not that keen on Confederation, so perhaps we could kill two birds witrh one stone.
It's said that in England these days, the largest number of church-goers these days belong to a missionary body from Italy. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on
:
I hear that UCCAN is partly due to a missionary body from Scotland !
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
I hear that UCCAN is partly due to a missionary body from Scotland !
Jumping John Knox, don't let the Presbyterian Church of Canada hear you say that! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Posted by daisymay (# 1480) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
I think that from the time of James VI in Scotland,only Charles II was crowned at Scone.(And he was not recognized as king in England at that time,during the time of Cromwell !)
The National church of Scotland has no coronation ceremony and for well over 100 years after the political Union of Scotland and England the crown of Scotland was hidden away,even lost ,some would say.
Queen Elizabeth came to Scotland after her coronation in London in 1953 and was present at a ceremony in the high Kirk of St Giles where she was shown,perhaps even presented with ,the crown.Her robes on that day were coat,hat and hand-bag.
And there was a lot of annoyance that she didn't dress "formally" and seemed to put Scotland down - and also her name as Elizabeth 2 was also causing fury - she's Elizabeth 1 with us... and of course, the UK.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
A good Canadian venue, Daviddrikell. A plus is that the climate's much the same as London (and quite a bit better than Edinburgh). The new monarch should feel at home.
Coronations in all of the Commonwealth monarchies have another plus. The Royal offspring can then lead trade delegations to the UK, selling Canadian (etc) goods - much as the present lot try to sell UK goods to us.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by daviddrinkell:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
I hear that UCCAN is partly due to a missionary body from Scotland !
Jumping John Knox, don't let the Presbyterian Church of Canada hear you say that!
We have been in Disruption since 1925. The Uniting Church in Australia is in a similar Disruption.
David:
Uh, the Anglicans weren't established in Newfoundland before 1949 either, AIUI. There was the Denominational Compromise and the resulting school system, but Long v. Gray (1863) meant that the Anglicans weren't established in Newfoundland.
Speaking of Carrilloneurs, define naughty.
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
quote:
Originally posted by daviddrinkell:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
I hear that UCCAN is partly due to a missionary body from Scotland !
Jumping John Knox, don't let the Presbyterian Church of Canada hear you say that!
We have been in Disruption since 1925. The Uniting Church in Australia is in a similar Disruption.
Being in disruption is a normal and happy state of affairs for a Presbyterian. If a Scotsman gets wrecked on a desert island the first thing he does is build two churches. One is the church he goes to and the other is the church he doesn't go to.
[ 17. March 2010, 16:57: Message edited by: daviddrinkell ]
Posted by ORGANMEISTER (# 6621) on
:
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a coronation in Vienna. I believe it required a special Act of the Austrian Parliament to allow the former royal family to return long enough to bury one of their one in the royal crypt.
Interesting trivia: (Try to follow this!) My son's Godfather's daughter's (Does this make them God-cousins?) Godmother is Otto's great-niece.
Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on
:
Those interested should obtain a copy of Roy Strong's* excellent Coronation which gives the history of the ceremony and provides some suggestions for future ones.
English coronations from Saxon times have always included three elements: crowning, annointing, and oath. Other parts seem to have been more flexible.
* Sir Roy is currently High Bailiff and Searcher of the Sanctuary of Westminster Abbey, which seems worthy of a thread on its own.
Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a coronation in Vienna. I believe it required a special Act of the Austrian Parliament to allow the former royal family to return long enough to bury one of their one in the royal crypt.
While it is true that the current republican revolutionary administration in Vienna continues to spill forth lie after lie about the God-fearing and Divinely Ordained House of Habsburg-Lothringen, I think they have relaxed their attitude somewhat. Karl, the current head of said divine House, lives in Salzburg.
Perhaps we will yet see a restoration. If not, we can only long for the return of Lord. I am sure his very first act will be to restore the Habsburgs and thereby restore order to the world.
Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on
:
If this last post isn't somewhat tongue in cheek,then I would have to say that I disagree with its contents.
I am happy to accept that the last Hapsburg emperor was indeed a very pious figure,who tried to do his best for his subjects during the period of WW1 and that he deserves the honours which the church have given him.
However God fearing and divinely ordained does not cover all of the Hapsburgs.What about Crown Prince Rudolf who 'abandoned ' his wife for a young girl and entered into a suicide pact with her (Mary Vetsera)?Most of the Hapsburgs may have been fairly pious,but they were often no better and no worse than many,many others.
Posted by New Yorker (# 9898) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
If this last post isn't somewhat tongue in cheek,then I would have to say that I disagree with its contents.
Ever so slightly so!
Posted by moveable_type (# 9673) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by ORGANMEISTER:
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a coronation in Vienna. I believe it required a special Act of the Austrian Parliament to allow the former royal family to return long enough to bury one of their one in the royal crypt.
While it is true that the current republican revolutionary administration in Vienna continues to spill forth lie after lie about the God-fearing and Divinely Ordained House of Habsburg-Lothringen, I think they have relaxed their attitude somewhat. Karl, the current head of said divine House, lives in Salzburg.
Perhaps we will yet see a restoration. If not, we can only long for the return of Lord. I am sure his very first act will be to restore the Habsburgs and thereby restore order to the world.
New Yorker, I think you'll find a republican revolutionary administration a bit closer to home than Vienna -
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
* Sir Roy is currently High Bailiff and Searcher of the Sanctuary of Westminster Abbey, which seems worthy of a thread on its own.
Not sure about that - he wandered into our church one day after Mass and recommended getting rid of all our lovely pews.
Knighthoods aren't everything, you know... ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posted by Freddy R (# 14391) on
:
quote:
quote:
We have been in Disruption since 1925. The Uniting Church in Australia is in a similar Disruption.
Being in disruption is a normal and happy state of affairs for a Presbyterian. If a Scotsman gets wrecked on a desert island the first thing he does is build two churches. One is the church he goes to and the other is the church he doesn't go to.
I've heard that one as Jewish joke.
[Serious code fix! Mamacita, Host]
[ 18. March 2010, 02:25: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
Posted by daviddrinkell (# 8854) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Freddy R:
quote:
quote:
We have been in Disruption since 1925. The Uniting Church in Australia is in a similar Disruption.
Being in disruption is a normal and happy state of affairs for a Presbyterian. If a Scotsman gets wrecked on a desert island the first thing he does is build two churches. One is the church he goes to and the other is the church he doesn't go to.
I've heard that one as Jewish joke.
It's getting a bit close to home for Anglicans these days too..... ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
[More code fix. Mamacita, Host]
[ 18. March 2010, 02:27: Message edited by: Mamacita ]
Posted by ken (# 2460) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
However God fearing and divinely ordained does not cover all of the Hapsburgs.
Europe would have probably had a much more pleasant time of modern history if some divinely-guided assassins had relieved us of the murdering bastards at some time in the 1610s.
Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on
:
True, but one of their current scions runs a very nice restaurant in Florence, so once you get passed the many, many, many wars, it's not all bad news!
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
About the crowning, that presents some interesting problems. The Stone of Scone was sent back to Edinburgh, and I predict it might take a politically courageous decision to bring it back to London even for a day.
As well, the Crowning is the only time the Sovereign actually wears St. Edward's Crown, it of many badges, insignia, and government iconography. The thing weighs 4.5 lbs so its very heavy to wear.
Posted by Forthview (# 12376) on
:
The political decision has already been taken,AFAIK.The stone was brought to scotland on the understanding that it would go back to London for a coronation.
However politicians have been known to change their mind about things.
Posted by PaulBC (# 13712) on
:
The next UK coronation CAN NOT be an inclusive multicultral affair. Oh the Cardinal Archbishop of Southwark and observe along with any mullah or rabbi or member of any other church. BUT a Coronation is a Church of England service. in its role as the established church in Britain. I do not believe the person being crowned can c hange that, even if he is the head of state & church. And I think that the next monacrh will have a short reign muchas King Edward VII did because he will be getting on himself. And I for the record am only a handful of years younger than the Prince of Wales. Could he not take the throne and pass it to Prince William ? Don't think that has ever been done .Besides which he is very much his mothers son vis a vis duty. ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
Posted by daisymay (# 1480) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Forthview:
The political decision has already been taken,AFAIK.The stone was brought to scotland on the understanding that it would go back to London for a coronation.
However politicians have been known to change their mind about things.
I remember vaguely when it was originally rescued and taken to Scotland and then got back again, demonstrating the stone breaks that were old. And I felt and still feel so glad that it lives in Scotland now - but I do wish it stayed there forever and if there is need to use it, then the queen/king should have that bit of the ceremony in Scotland, even though a double-coronation would be really a bit much for them...
And we've seen this in Scone Palace.
[ 18. March 2010, 22:34: Message edited by: daisymay ]
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on
:
The Holy Father used to be a crowned monarch didnt he and with a Coronation?
Or is it not quite the same as the Coronation of a head of state?
Posted by Vaticanchic (# 13869) on
:
I suspect it might still be treason to contemplate the death of the Sovereign.
And one of the more extraordinary acclamations at the coronation is "May the Queen live forever" and this is not unique to Christian monarchies.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
In Canada we're safe. Sections 46 and 47 of the Criminal Code define both Treason and High Treason; speculating on a future coronation is completely legal.
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on
:
Prince Charles is keen on other faiths isnt he so I guess he'll want them being a part of his coronation. (That is if he is the one to have one).
Posted by LQ (# 11596) on
:
For reference, here is the order of service for the Coronation Mass in 1953.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
SPK , there's never been a problem with thinking about the monarch's death,or funeral for that matter. No problem either about planning the successor's coronation. Contemplation means plotting to bring about.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
Ooooh, I almost forgot. One change since 1953 is that there are more Heralds about the place now. Canada long had a strained relationship with the College of Heralds in London, and the Lord Lyon did a fair business here, including granting my University's arms. But neither could draw a Maple Leaf correctly and the College of Arms became irksome in later years, so we formed the Canadian Heraldic Authority in 1988. Both the College and the Lord Lyon and his Court traditionally attend the Coronation, as do Commonwealth Prime Ministers. I hope the Chief Herald of Canada may attend. I don't think the Canadian Heraldic Authority have any Tabards, but I'm sure something could be arranged.
Posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known (# 11399) on
:
And a proper tabard there shall be.
As for the inclusion of other faiths in the Coronation Service for whomever succeeds HMtQ, their role is at best minimal.
IIRC, the Moderator of the CofS was an active participant in the Rite when HMtQ was presented the Bible for the Oath.
On the subject of vestments, will the Ornaments Rubric be invoked? The footage of the last coronation had copes and choir dress for the lot of the dignitaries, but I cannot make out whether or not stoles were worn under the cope by the reigning ++Cantuar that time, if at all. I don't even recall if miters were involved.... A
Will a chasuble be worn for the Communion rite in the Coronation, or does the said vestment remain verboten?
Posted by Eddy (# 3583) on
:
quote:
As for the inclusion of other faiths in the Coronation Service for whomever succeeds HMtQ, their role is at best minimal.
Why so? After all lots of the Queens people are Muslims or of other faiths.
No comment yet on Pope's being crowned I know the triple tiara has gone out of fashion, maybe as the papal coronation did. I'm guessing that what the HF was crowned with.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0