Thursday, 16 February 2012
The Queen visits Lambeth Palace
Lambeth Palace reports: The Queen attends multi-faith reception at Lambeth Palace
Archbishop Rowan Williams hosted a multi-faith reception today for Her Majesty the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh at Lambeth Palace.
His Grace The Archbishop of Canterbury and Mrs Williams received Her Majesty The Queen and His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh at the Main Doors of the Blore Building at Lambeth Palace. The Archbishop accompanied Her Majesty, and Mrs Williams accompanied His Royal Highness, to meet guests first to the State Drawing Room and then to the Pink Dining Room.
The royal couple met representatives of the eight non-Christian religions - the Baha’i, the Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and Zoroastrian communities - as well as Christian representatives. Each group of faith leaders was gathered around a sacred object selected by them for display at the Celebration as an object of particular significance to the faith or practice of their community, or their life in the United Kingdom…
Scroll down for the full texts of the speeches, and there are audio links as well.
The text of the Queen’s speech is also here.
And see also Sacred objects displayed by faith communities to the Queen.
Press Association Queen says the Church of England is misunderstood
Telegraph The Church is under-appreciated says the Queen and Value the Church’s role, says Queen
Guardian Editorial: Faith and the state: turn the other cheek
Mail Queen stands up for Christianity: ‘Church of England is misunderstood and under-appreciated’
BBC Queen highlights Church of England’s duty to all faiths
New Statesman Nelson Jones Defending the Faith
Posted by Simon Sarmiento on
Thursday, 16 February 2012 at 7:56am GMT
…In such a context, it becomes politic for the monarch — whose own role is supposed to embody unity rather than division — to assert that the established church has been responsible for Britain’s tradition of religious tolerance and pluralism. Historically, however, this is at best misleading, at worst a deliberate distortion.
In truth, the Church of England fought for centuries to preserve, first its religious monopoly and later its privileged position in society. The right to worship — or not to worship — freely was wrested piecemeal from unwilling Anglican prelates. Well into the nineteenth century Roman Catholics and Jews had limited civil rights. Until the University Tests Act of 1871 — that’s 1871 — non-Anglicans were barred from fellowships at Oxford and Cambridge (though not at University College London, which was founded in 1826 on the radical principle that higher education need not be a monopoly of the established Church)…
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Church of England
The Queen sets a good example of what Anglicanism is really all about. One does wonder what people like Lord Carey think of this Lambeth hospitality to the Leaders of other Faith Communities. Would he find this gathering a threat to Christianity in the U.K., I wonder?
"In my Father's House are many mansions".
The royal couple met representatives of "the eight non-Christian religions - the Baha'i, the Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and Zoroastrian communities". 'The eight?' Surely there are more...? It would have made more sense simply to say 'eight'.
One does wonder what people like Lord Carey think of this Lambeth hospitality to the Leaders of other Faith Communities. Would he find this gathering a threat to Christianity in the U.K., I wonder?
This is quite a sweeping statement. The logic seems to be that since Lord Carey is orthodox/conservative he is obviously threatened by other religions. Why does this follow? In my experience those who identify as "liberal" Christians can be just as threatened by opinions different from their own. I think it depends on personality rather than theology as to how well people cope with these differences.
Is that a purple cassock ++Rowan seems to be wearing? It actually looks pretty good on him. Given that he is normally seen wearing black (and his reasons for doing so can certainly be defended) can anyone who follows such things tell me on what other occasions he sees fit to put on the purple?
"The logic seems to be that since Lord Carey is orthodox/conservative he is obviously threatened by other religions." - William, on Thursday -
Because, William, the ex-ABC seems very concerned about what he sees as 'persecution of Christians' in the U.K. His 'retirement' activity on this issue seems to amount almost to paranoia. He seems to think that since he left office, the country (and maybe the C.of E.) has gone to the dogs. He certainly didn't like Bishops in the House of Lords making protestations on behalf of child beneficiaries.
You may remember he wore a purple cassock when the Pope was received at Holyrood Palace last year. He also wears it consistently in cathedral and church, often hidden beneath vestments.
The Archbishop also sometimes wears a white cassock (with a purple cincture) in tropical countries. What he never wears is a purple shirt.
You can see all three colours of cassock in the photographs here.
On a pedantic note: please be careful with the verb "visit". On a first glance at the title of this post, I thought something much less jolly and much more surprising than a multi-faith reception was happening.
I like the Queen , but this is pure bilge. The successor of Peter will protect my Church and not the Church of England.
The Church of England stole our property, endowments and many of our people and for 300 years (to varying degrees) shamefully acquiesced in persecution.
What about 1662, as well..what an insult to Nonconformists.
"The Church of England stole our property, endowments and many of our people and for 300 years (to varying degrees) shamefully acquiesced in persecution." - Robert Ian Williams -
Is this for real? Do Thinking Anglicans accept this sort of bilge?