I especially enjoyed the music using during the 'service'. As for the 'service'? I think the whole show was written and directed by John Cleese and the Monty Python team. Noone could have done a better job.

Long live Lizzie the Last!

dkit

I suspect that Charles, for all his weird habits and idiosyncrasies, probably has his own views on this mythical god being. He also is smart enough to keep them to himself as, if he didn`t, he would not be king.

Tony Eagleton (so well known!) and "reason" are strangers to each other. The Monarchy, no matter who the Monarch is, protects us from politicians: one example of this being the Monarchy's representative in Australia sacking the horrendous Gough Whitlam, an act supported overwhelmingly by the people at the ensuing election.

Thanks for this article exposing another dill we would not normally know about.

What we do not need is a foreign King who puts English concerns ahead of ours, especially when it comes to trade issues. The King may serve God, but how is that demonstrated, by fidelity in marriage, e.g.?

For mine we need to become a republic. But before that we need a bill of rights that must include a citizens'-initiated referenda. So, in the event of a corrupt individual taking power, the citizens could compel an election. And optional preferencing, e.g.!

That said, we may follow Britian which may become a republic before we do.
Alan B.

A Republic requires people with sense who care & who know more words than the word 'Money' !

Thanks Peter Sellick for the article- some food for thought. I often think the US's slave to separation of church and state has led to some problems. Yet the US is one of the more religious nations- in some ways perhaps more religious than the UK.

Dear Canem Malum,

What makes you think that the US is religious?

Yes, there are more nominal Christians there, there are more who use certain passages of the Bible to excuse their hatred of God's other children, their lust, greed, delusion, anger, pride and jealousy.

But "religious"?

---

It is often our wishful thinking that the Church will uplift the state.
Instead, more commonly, the state pulls down and sinks the Church with it.

I am over it.

But I accept it is part of daily life right now.
I know full well that the great unwashed majority has a powerful instinctive need to be subsurvient to a strong leader.
It makes that majority feel safe and wanted?
Which makes countries with a monarchy more stable socially?
But we should note that, in our case, the monarchy is a servant of the state

I have often wondered why someone who heads a democracy is also head of a religious group.
Religion is clearly a dictatorship, so the two things are opposing.
Eventually, this nonsense must cease.
And the population must just grow-up.
And let reason permeate that layer of absurdity which is constraining them.
And allow free thinking to devise a better system of government.

But not yet.

Maybe this might answer Yuyutsu's question- though coming from a different culture might make it difficult to see things from a European Christian perspective... Even though he may live in a western nation- there is only so much room in ones head for different ideas.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel01.html

Dear Canem Malum,

«Maybe this might answer Yuyutsu's question»

My question was about religion in America.

Your answer seems to be about Western sectarianism.

What has the one to do with the other?