Accession Proclamation of King Charles III

A quick summary of today's proceedings and pageantry at St. James's Palace in London:

If you have more time, below is a full account of the proceedings from the official website of the British Monarchy.  Of course, you can always use your right-arrow key to skip ahead through the dull bits - though some of those bits are quite fascinating, actually, if you know what you are looking at: the current Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Leader of His Majesty's Official Opposition, all six former Prime Ministers, together with bishops and archbishops, and all the company of (British political) Heaven mixing and mingling when they are not the center of attention.  

The proceedings in the Council chamber and in the Throne Room are are admirably led with perfect poise by the Rt. Hon. Penny Mordaunt, lately a candidate for Prime Minister, now Lord President of the Council.

The proclamation ceremony on the balcony abvove Friary Court is led by Garter King of Arms.

N, B. -- Today's ceremonies (which will be repeated elsewhere in the kingdom tomorrow) do not "make" Charles king - they are in no sense an "inauguration," and certainly not a "coronation," as I saw one wildly inaccurate news source report.  They merely proclaim him to be the rightful and lawful king, so there is no question in the public mind.  Charles became king in the very instant of his mother's death.  That is how inheritance works, for kings and for commoners.  The Sovereign always exists, without a moment's gap in continuity.  Hence the age-old saying:  The King (or Queen) is dead.  Long live the King.

When the time comes for his coronation, that ceremony likewise will not "make" Charles king - he is and has been fully and truly king from the first moment of his reign.  The coronation is a religious ceremony held to bless and sanctify the King, and provide an even greater, grander public affirmation of his right to rule according to law, with justice and mercy.  As no doubt we shall see sometime next year.

In our super-duper, oh-so-modern, allegedly democratic age, is all this ceremony necessary?  No, obviously not.  Is it a great treasure worth keeping after a thousand years' continuance, something to be honored, revered, and cherished?  I say, YES, as long as there are fit and worthy successors to the Crown, and a loyal, appreciative people to reign over.  (There is something to be said for a republic, too - it all depends on the history and character of a nation.)

Why?  You have only to look at the lifelong service of the late, beloved Queen, and the admiration of billions of people all around the world, for the answer.  Britain and her other realms and territories would have rocked and rumbled along without her at the top, as have even more former realms and territories.  But how nice it is to have a living, breathing person at the pinnacle to look up to - kind and just and impartial, the gracious focus of national unity, in good times and bad, the immovable center in the ever-changing whirl of politics and society.

Many people in the slimmed-down, skinny-pants modern world have decided that a hat is no longer a necessary article of clothing, a useless expense, a needless bother; but there are in fact still many occasions on which a hat is a very comfortable and useful thing, and it may even become part of one's identity.  The same might be said of a cap - or a Crown.

It is written:  He who would be the greatest of all must be the servant of all.  A fearsome calling; but to the envy of other nations, Britain has been blessed with a long succession of worthy kings and queens, and I hope always will be.  Despite the mindless speculations of silly commentators, I have no doubt that Charles will be a most excellent addition to the list - a chip off the old block, as it were - and William too, in the fullness of time.  They have it in their bones.

God save the King.

-----