All eyes will be on London for Saturday’s coronation of King Charles III at Westminster Abbey. For some, it will be all about the pomp and pageantry; for others, it will be seen as an anachronism, while others will be utterly indifferent to the event.

These approaches may lack the nuance of contemporary political culture. Pomp and pageantry, rites and ritual are often dismissed as anachronistic. Yet, all modern nation-states rely on such traditions and practices to periodically remind citizens of their historical past.

Even the most ahistorical leaders – and our leaders are certainly pig ignorant of history – periodically engage in such rituals and commemorations to celebrate people, places and events that had a role in shaping the polity. Without such practices, the ‘state’ divorces itself from the ‘nation’ and its legitimacy will slowly erode.

Paradoxically, any political society depends on both anachronisms and indifference. Anachronisms point to the historical reality of the nation – whether invented or otherwise. Meanwhile, a healthy dose of indifference should be the ultimate goal of politics – a successful polity is one where who governs is not a matter of life and death for most citizens.

Ultimately, the coronation and popular attitudes to it are a reminder that society is made up of different layers – of ritual and rite and a past informing the present. Most of that is slowly being sidelined; thus, many European countries are slowly losing the original reference points that shaped much of their societies.

For example, the coronation occurs within the context of a service of Holy Communion. This is quite significant since it is a reminder that all leadership roles are given ‘on loan’ and that it should ultimately be an act of service. This point is further driven home by the action of anointing – considered so sacred that it is never televised.

The coronation will also have vital elements of ecumenism. The processional cross will contain a fragment of the Cross of Christ – a gift by Pope Francis to the king. In addition, other religious representatives will participate in the service by reading and reciting prayers.

Though rites and rituals are often written off as anachronistic, they are perhaps the last reminder of a society that has not been sanitised by bland anti-historical wokeism.

The negative reaction in some quarters to such events is understandable since it strikes right at the heart of one of the most significant cultural crises in the West – that of wanting to eradicate any reference to a heritage shaped on three important hills: the Acropolis, the Capitolium and the Golgotha. The late Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI rightly argued that divorcing the West from these roots endangers its continuation.

The coronation will also, in some respects, reflect the king’s interest. The newly crowned king is no intellectual pygmy. His interests in religion, ecumenism and inter-religious dialogue were a leitmotif during his time as Prince of Wales.

When no one was raising the concern of the ongoing de facto genocide of Christians in the Middle East, he spoke of their endurance and courage and their “extraordinary grace and capacity for forgiveness”. He described this as not passive submissiveness but “an act of supreme courage, of a refusal to be defined by the sin against you, of determination that love will triumph over hate”.

When no one was raising concern about the de facto genocide of Christians in the Middle East, King Charles spoke of their endurance and courage- André DeBattista

He also paid tribute to those of other faiths who defended the rights of their Christian co-citizens. He drove home that “coexistence and understanding are not just possible; therefore, they are confirmed by hundreds of years of shared experience. Extremism and division are by no means inevitable”.

At the time, he was one of the few leaders to do so.

Similarly, he was also one of the first to put on the agenda the environmental crisis. Until the late 1980s, he was one of the few to advocate for better recycling practices, organic farming, the circular economy and natural capital. Again, he was mocked and derided until the general convention came around to his point of view – he was right all along.

For him, this is not a mere matter of science. He knew that, if any success was to be made, he had to tap into other sources that bring together a society. Therefore, he had no qualms about making his point about the environment while, for example, citing holy texts from indigenous cultures or, reappraising pre-industrial techniques. The complex tesserae which make up any society should be upheld and celebrated.

Past and present, sacred and secular – and the interplay between these – will be most evident at the coronation service. Yet, this is also a leitmotif of the life and work of Charles III.

One of his best speeches, delivered at the ‘Sacred Web Conference’ in September 2006, succinctly sums up his views. He calls for “constancy” above the “clamour, the din and the sheer pace of our lives to help us rediscover those truths that are immutable and eternal”.

For him, traditionalism should not be about repeating the past or wallowing in nostalgia. Instead, it is a “yearning for the sacred” since “in the pre-modern world, all civilisations were marked by the presence of the sacred”. He understands traditionalism as a way of acknowledging underlying principles and timeless metaphysical realities – “as true now as they have ever been and will be”.

On the other hand, modernism has very little time for reality or context but chooses to see everything through the lens of ideology. As a result, modernism is obsessed with “disintegration, disconnection and deconstruction” and, in doing so, it has robbed itself of the ability to foster integration.

Thus, in his view, tradition is a living principle and its loss “cuts to the very core of our being since it conditions that which we can ‘know’ and ‘be’”. This contrasts with the modern obsession with what we can achieve and do. He summarises the main contrast between traditionalism and modernism: “While it has enabled us to know much that has been of material benefit, it also prevents us from knowing that… which enables us to be fully human.”

When the pomp and pageantry are gone, when the inane tittle-tattle dies out, perhaps, there can be some serious engagement with the work and thought of this ‘philosopher king’.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.