Walking A Tight-Rope, Juggling Multiculturalism
In March this year, Anglican Bishop Ceirion H. Dewar wrote an unprecedented open letter to the King:
Your Majesty’s subjects … are asking for leadership. They are asking that the sovereign who bears the title Defender of the Faith remember what that title means. They are asking that the Crown hear the growing cry of anguish from Christians across this land who feel that the spiritual inheritance of their nation is being surrendered without resistance. And they are asking whether the Crown will stand with them.
In July, I wrote to His Majesty, King Charles III, expressing my concern about his public comments on contentious issues of a religious nature. This week, I received a response from James Dawson, Head of Royal Correspondence.
The King’s reply is code for ‘I’m not for turning.’ This is clear in the words, ‘which continue to guide him‘. Unlike his mother, Queen Elizabeth, Charles, has long commented on public issues. As Crown Prince, he was quite vocal on issues such as climate warming and architecture. His son, Prince William has likewise delved beyond concerns we can all agree on, such as mental health, and expressed sentiments on contentious issues such as Islam being a religion of peace.
The words, ‘Christian values of … love for all‘ tell us where his sympathy for multiculturalism comes from. It’s why we all bought into it, at least initially. Perhaps it is because His Majesty is shielded from the messy reality that he is rather slow to accept the consequences; love, when unreciprocated and taken advantage of, is ruinous. Perhaps it is because he has too much love.
The King has done some exemplary work that I cannot praise highly enough, such as the Pondbury Project. But that is not the point.
Whether or not you agree with these views, their expression undermines the political neutrality of the crown. The King has the opportunity to express his personal views when he meets every week with the Prime Minister. Beyond that, his real powers in matters political are in reserve, to exercise only in the protection of democracy. His Subjects decide their own fate.
Australia’s Need For Regal Independence
The Australian Monarchist League has stated,
Under a constitutional monarchy, the Sovereign’s role is to remain politically neutral and to exercise the rights “to be consulted, to encourage and to warn” in private, not to advocate public policy in his own right. … In our view the fault here lies less with the King than with successive British governments and advisers who have allowed, and perhaps encouraged, the blurring of these lines.
Page 5, Liberty. Aug, 2026.
Australian governments have no power to influence the King as UK governments do. For this reason and others, Australia should have its own monarchy; a monarchy modeled on the Governor-General’s office which is more formally neutral and modestly endowed than the British monarchy and yet which still retains the Reserve Powers that protect our democracy.
For a detailed description of this proposal, click HERE. You can also follow my Facebook Page An Australian Crown, Not a President.
The King’s Birthday Public Holiday, Monday October 5th
Past Posts on The King’s Birthday
Upcoming Posts:
The Family That Could Be Australia’s Royals
Road to Better Government
Leave a Reply