Coronation 2023 - Orders of Service
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    For those who may be interested:

    1. A link to a synopsis (the real kind) of coronation orders of service from 1689 to 2023 (all are toggled on for comparison, but you can toggle them off as you prefer): https://www.oremus.org/coronation/synopsis/

    Related trivia: The only surviving person to have attended the 1937 coronation is the current Earl of Airlie, who served as page to his father, who was Queen Elizabeth’s [the Queen Mother] Lord Chamberlain.

    2. PDFs below of two versions of the 2023 coronation order of service, one without commentary, the other with commentary. In terms of music, I would note: There will be lots of music, with many newly commissioned works as is traditional, of course…, and the commentary version provides more detail (for example, the famous Parry setting of “I Was Glad” from the 1902 coronation will be sung for the procession; that’s not indicated in the simpler file). This time ‘round, there will be not one but two congregational hymns (Christ is Made The Sure Foundation & Praise My Soul The King of Heaven); Vaughan Williams’ setting of the Old Hundredth for Communion that was such an innovation in 1953 just for having the congregation sing anything is not included. The inclusion of the Byrd Gloria from the Mass for Four Voices appears, from the commentary version, to be a deliberate nod to the legacy of recusant British Catholics in the realm during the Reformation (and this year also is the 400th anniversary of Byrd's death).

    3. PDF below of a Research Briefing on coronations published by the Library of the House of Commons this week. Trivia from that: 1. The Chairs of Estate are from the 1953 coronation, while the Throne Chairs are from the 1937 Coronation; and 2. "On the occasion of King Charles III’s coronation, peers have been requested not to wear traditional robes, including coronets. They may opt to wear parliamentary ermine (the robes that they wear for the State Opening of Parliament) or standard business attire. According to Lord Moore of Etchingham, however, the crowns of the UK’s four Kings of Arms – Garter, Clarenceux, Norroy & Ulster and Lord Lyon – will be worn at the coronation on 6 May 2023. According to The Times, there are “rumours within palace circles that no royal women will wear tiaras”, while the Princess of Wales may opt to wear flowers in her hair instead. Invitees have been provided with guidance which states that Parliamentary Robes “may be worn, if desired”, while ladies can wear day dress (hats/fascinators optional) and men morning coat, lounge suit or uniform. Both can wear “Celebratory National Dress” and decorations."

    4. For folks who might watch the proceedings, the only American network that exercised a modicum of restraint in commenting over music and ritual (that is, treating those as a soundtrack over which value-added chatter would be imposed) in the events of last September was CNN, largely because it has a full London office largely staffed by folks from the British Isles who know better (the late Don Lemon was the sole Amurkan in the commenting chairs, and it was clear he was restrained by the others). On cable, BBC News and BBC America are far better options; BritBox streaming channel will supposedly also be streaming live. For those lacking those options, SkyNews online is the best bet: https://news.sky.com/king-charles-coronation

    5. Schedule translated into Eastern Daylight Time:

    4 am: Congregation to be seated inside the abbey.
    4.30 am onward: Heads of state, overseas government representatives, government ministers, first ministers, former prime ministers, foreign royals and members of the royal family arrive.
    4.45 am: The Sovereign’s Escort of the Household Cavalry begin to gather for the procession from Buckingham Palace.
    5.20 am: The king and queen’s procession sets off from the palace.
    5.53 am: The king and queen arrive at Westminster Abbey.
    6 am: They enter the Abbey through the Great West Door and the service begins.
    7 am: The king is crowned. Trumpets will sound and gun salutes will be fired across the UK.
    8 am: The service ends and the king and queen begin their coronation procession back to Buckingham Palace in the gold state coach.
    8.33 am: The king and queen enter Buckingham Palace through the Centre Arch.
    8.45 am: The king and queen receive a royal salute from the military in the palace gardens
    ~ 9.15 am: The king, queen and working members of the royal family appear on the palace balcony to watch the flyover.

    Thanked by 7ServiamScores StimsonInRehab CHGiffen MarkS tomjaw Anna_Bendiksen M. Jackson Osborn
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    William IV had a sense of humor. He wanted to forego the 1831 coronation. Per the Research Briefing footnote 42:

    "[The 1831 coronation] was nicknamed the “Half-Crownation”. On a visit to Parliament for its dissolution, William IV had grabbed the Imperial State Crown while in the robing room of the House of Lords, put it on his head and remarked to Lord Grey, the Prime Minister: “The Coronation is over.” "
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Earl_GreyEarl_Grey
    Posts: 904
    nd remarked to Lord Grey, the Prime Minister:


    The good ol' days.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • SponsaChristi
    Posts: 402
    I find it rather ironic the amount of Byrd’s music sung during this considering that much of his compositions were written for clandestine Masses because the practice of Catholicism was made illegal. Ironically, today is also the Feast on the English Martyrs.
    Thanked by 5ServiamScores tandrews tomjaw Caleferink DavidOLGC
  • FSSPmusic
    Posts: 285
    Note the commentary:
    This Gloria comes from a Mass setting originally composed for recusant Roman Catholics (those who refused to adopt the doctrine of the newly established Church of England after the Reformation). It has since been embraced into the central repertoire of many Anglican Cathedrals and choral foundations.
    They also mention that this year marks the 400th anniversary of Byrd's death. This bit is most interesting:
    The St Augustine Gospels, a Latin translation of the Gospels, are a UNESCO World Heritage object, and precious historic artefact. As a tangible link to this country's faith heritage throughout the centuries, they are the liturgical Gospel Book for this procession and reading. The St Augustine Gospels were carried to England by St Augustine of Canterbury from Rome in 597, where Pope Gregory the Great had presented them to him.
    Will the Gospel actually be read in Latin? ICYMI, the score for the Vivats has been published online.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    The St Augustine Gospels were carried in procession in front of the royal chaplain (The Rt Revd & Rt Hon. Dame Sarah Mullally, DBE, Dean of HM Chapels Royal) who proclaimed the Gospel (Luke 4:16-21) in English from a separate card.
  • Jeffrey Quick
    Posts: 2,086
    SponsaChristi, I was at a concert/history lesson last night, focused on Henry VIII and the Mary Rose, and near the end there was a slide discussing Henry's contribution to naval shipbuilding and eventual maritime dominance. It felt like ending a show on Hitler with a discussion of the Autobahn and Volkswagen.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw CharlesW
  • tomjaw
    Posts: 2,782
    @Liam, it reminded me of halloween seeing all those people dressed up in clothes that do not belong to them.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    Hitler lost; Henry VIII didn't.
    Thanked by 1Jeffrey Quick
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    I wonder if both are enjoying each other's company in the same place.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw Jeffrey Quick
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    I kept looking for Jackson in the background at the coronation.
    Did anyone see him?
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,886
    I confess, I teared up as Parry's "I was glad" started up. Totally overwhelming. I loved it. These rituals are good for the soul, I'm convinced.
    Thanked by 1Caleferink
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,886
    Also, I found the chanting of the Veni Creator quite interesting. I was glad it was done, but it must be a local (Sarum?) variant translated into the vernacular. It was the flattened note at the end of the last phrase that really stuck out to me. Not opposed, to be clear. Just intrigued.
    Thanked by 1Caleferink
  • Caleferink
    Posts: 434
    Not a musical question here, but something (perhaps small, perhaps not) that I picked up on: when the King was being addressed directly, it was always "Your Majesty," EXCEPT when the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland presented the Bible, he did so with "Sir." Just wondering if anyone had any insight into that, whether it has something to do with the movement for Scottish independence or other political reasons, theological reasons, or if I'm just blowing it out of proportion.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    The styling was made less arch in some other places in the text. For example, "Are you willing to take the oath?" rather than "Is your Majesty willing to take the oath?" and the name of Charles in the order of service being ini-capped instead of all-capped.

    It could be the last coronation. William may, if his government then in charge does not object, opt to change to enthronement in Parliament, and have his regalia presented to him but not donning any of it.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    William may, if his government then in charge does not object, opt to change to enthronement in Parliament, and have his regalia presented to him but not donning any of it.

    Which would, frankly, be a travesty.
    Thanked by 2ServiamScores tomjaw
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    That may be, but it's more than most.The UK is the only European country left with a coronation (and Tonga is the only other Christian nation with one) and by the next accession, there may well not be any UK.
    Thanked by 1CharlesW
  • vansensei
    Posts: 219
    I don't like the new Vivat. The stress is weird. It feels like "vat" should be 2 and 3 and Rex on 4. The rest of the music was splendid, as was the chance to hear Zadok the Priest live. Truly one of the greatest works of music ever written.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    IIRC, Carolus is consistent with Georgius (1937 & 1911) and Edwardus (1902). Gugliemus will be more consistent with the Elizabetha most of us have heard over the decades in recordings of the 1953 services. If something unfortunate were to happen to the current Waleses, don't ask about King Archie.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,886
    I agree about the vivat… Carolus sounds like “Carlos”. Took me by surprise.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,414
    This was a long awaited day for me.
    When I was much, much younger I hoped to see the impossibly distant year of 2000, or Charles crowned king - whichever came last.
    Now I hope to see William crowned king.
    I wonder how many people outside the abbey said that optional oath of allegiance to the king.
    (I did.)
    The world would be a rather emptier and boring place without the British monarchy.
    Thanked by 2ServiamScores tomjaw
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,467
    Our local Choral Society had a long planned concert on May 6th. We changed the programme to start with Zadok the Priest. I admit to choking on part of this, since he is my King (and Lord of Mann), however I found watching the Coronation less moving than I had done as a slightly sceptical 14 year old 70 years ago.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen tomjaw
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    I wonder how many people outside the abbey said that optional oath of allegiance to the king.

    I didn't (since I am not a British subject), but I did take that opportunity to pray for His Majesty, and for his conversion and that of England; and I did join the the acclamation of "God save King Charles" after the oath. I had to stop watching shortly before the anointing and crowning of the Queen because I had to do the 8:00 am daily Mass: but my pastor, being an anglophile, added a similar prayer for the King and Queen, and for the UK, in the General Intercessions after the prayer for the President, Governor, and the US.

    I know some might find it odd, but for the past few months I have been including the King and Queen and the Archbishop of Canterbury in my intentions for my Rosary, that however imperfect they are, God might use them and the Coronation as His instruments. While not everything was perfectly to my liking, there were some important things that I think point in the right direction: First, the fact that the Chrism was consecrated by the Orthodox in Jerusalem, which means that it was actually validly consecrated. Second, that the Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster took part. Third, that His Majesty requested that the anointing, the most sacred part of the Rite, take place entirely veiled from view, and so commissioned the screen with the Tree of Life and the wonderful quotation from St. Julian of Norwich that "All shall be well" (words of encouragement in these difficult times), rather than just using a canopy. Fourth, the "theme" of the Coronation being that of the King as the servant of the people, with the recurring quotation from the scriptures: I have not come to be served, but to serve. And little things, like using the Gloria from Byrd's "Mass for Four Voices"; and having the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Bishops of London and Dover, and the chaplains to the King and Queen wear copes borrowed from Westminster Cathedral, and non liturgical things like "The Big Lunch" and "The Big Help Out" to encourage people to get out and meet their neighbors and build-up their local communities. King Charles and Queen Camilla are by no means perfect, but I think that if people give them a chance (and stop focusing on the late Princess of Wales and the Duke of Sussex), they can be a force for tremendous good.
    Thanked by 6ServiamScores M. Jackson Osborn tomjaw OMagnumMysterium Elmar Caleferink
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,886
    However imperfect it may have been, the coronation was one of the most overtly Christian displays in recent memory. It was (dare I say it) unapologetically Christian. And patriotic. And full of ancient ritual and symbolism. All of these things are so sorely lacking in our times that I found it al refreshing. The world needs ritual like this to moore it to the transcendent. I pray it had a profound effect on many souls.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw Caleferink
  • Chris Garton-Zavesky
    Posts: 6,902
    This
    , the coronation was one of the most overtly Christian displays in recent memory. It was (dare I say it) unapologetically Christian.


    is all the more remarkable given the public statements and semi-private actions of His Majesty King Charles III in the 50 years plus when he was Prince of Wales.
    Thanked by 3tomjaw CharlesW ServiamScores
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,886
    Well, here's to hoping his anointing will have a spiritual effect, and he will feel, deep within his soul, the fact that he is a Christian, and needs to act like such. No more of this 'defender of the faiths' business. No one is beyond conversion while he still has breath.

    It seemed to me he wore a rather profound expression on his face for much of the ceremony, and to outward appearances it seems that he was taking it all rather seriously and felt tremendous emotion about it. Let's hope this was indeed the case and trust that our Lord will richly bless him to be a good monarch.
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn Reval
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    Or he was just concentrating on not needing to relieve his bladder, being a man in his mid-70s who almost certainly under-hydrated to get through the long time without access to the WC.
  • Reval
    Posts: 186
    I agree about King Charles' facial expression. To me it looked like an expression of surprise and wonder: "All this? Is this really happening - to me?"
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • PaxMelodious
    Posts: 440
    Rather odd to see you all so interested in this event.

    The British monarchy standards for colonialism and genocide. 'Tis very hard to see part that.
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,886
    Sigh. Pax, let's not go there, or else we will have to also debate other canards like "the church stands for slavery and the subservience of women." Every prosperous culture in human history has sought to expand its borders by hook or by crook. This is not a sin that is unique to GB, just as slavery is hardly unique to the USA.
    Thanked by 7M. Jackson Osborn tomjaw CharlesW Jeffrey Quick CHGiffen Caleferink LauraKaz
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,978
    It is pointless to judge the past by today's standards, assuming today even has any standards.

    I did not see him but heard there was a Catholic cardinal there and that Pope Francis sent relics of the cross.

    Christianity is getting to be like a college fraternity. Instead of kissing an animal's behind to get in, you need to kiss the butt of a heretic. LOL
    Thanked by 6M. Jackson Osborn DavidOLGC ServiamScores CHGiffen tomjaw LauraKaz
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,414
    Why is Britain and its monarchy burdened with the matter of slavery, racism, and colonialism, as if they were the only ones who bore the stain of these sins? Portugal, Spain, Belgium, France, Italy, Germany, the US, the Dutch, to name but a few - and Africans themselves, were involved in the slave trade. They stopped these crimes almost two hundred years ago, the US being the last to do so and had to have a civil war to do so. Truth be known, one of the great fears that Britain was going to outlaw the slave trade was fuel for the American revolution. (And Britain did just that.) Once upon a time Anglo-Saxons were enslaved by the Irish (St Patrick being a notable example) and the Romans. The coasts of Europe were for centuries ravaged by Mohammedans from Africa who carried the inhabitants into slavery in North Africa and else where. King Leopold of Belgium himself personally owned most of the Congo and plundered it mercilessly. Cecil Rhodes, of Rhodes Scholar fame, was another who built a fortune in Africa. I don't hear of anyone refusing his or her scholarships and philanthropy on account of Rhodes's dark side.

    All of these countries and men and women are things of the past. We should acknowledge their philanthropy and great civic undertakings - and certainly not hold their current descendants guilty for their crimes. They were normal people of their age. If those who wish to find racists they need to look no further than their own great great grandparents. Nearly everyone in past days was to a degree racist - so take great great grandmother's picture off the wall and burn it.

    And all this is not to excuse Black Africans themselves, for it was the powerful tribes who preyed on weaker ones and sold them to anyone who would buy them.

    Along with the evils of the past we owe a great debt of gratitude to our ancestors of history for all the good of our world to thank.
    Thanked by 3CharlesW ServiamScores tomjaw
  • DavidOLGCDavidOLGC
    Posts: 88
    Although I can appreciate the musical and social elements of the coronation ceremony that have been praised so far, something still bothers me.

    My issue has to do with the fact that King Charles is also the Supreme governor of the Church of England, which is not in full communion with the Catholic Church.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican–Roman_Catholic_dialogue

    "According to Roman Catholic canon law, Roman Catholics should not receive the Anglican Eucharist.[11]"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolicae_curae#:~:text=While firmly restating the judgment,Utrecht who are validly ordained.

    "Apostolicae curae is the title of a papal bull, issued in 1896 by Pope Leo XIII, declaring all Anglican ordinations to be "absolutely null and utterly void"."

    "In 1998, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a doctrinal commentary to accompany Pope John Paul II's apostolic letter Ad tuendam fidem, which established the formula of the profession of faith to be made by those assuming certain offices in the church. The congregation's commentary listed Leo XIII's declaration in Apostolicae curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations as an example of "those truths connected to revelation by historical necessity and which are to be held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed". Anyone who denies such truths "would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church".[28]"

    https://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2011/01/20/the-validity-of-anglican-holy-orders/

    I know there are paths for Anglicans to enter into full communion with our church, but from what I can gather, the Anglican Church itself is still technically not in communion with the Catholic Church.

    One must remember why Henry VIII separated himself and the Church of England from the Catholic faith - and that the Church of England is still separated.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    Tangent on Catholic dynasties for contrast: the NY Times complemented its Windsors coverage with a profile of the 25 year old Ferdinand Zvonimir Maria Balthus Keith Michael Otto Antal Bahnam Leonhard von Habsburg-Lothringen, the heir to Karl, heir of Otto, heir of Karl I:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/05/style/ferdinand-habsburg-royal-racecar-driving.html

    The young man is active with the Catholic community Center John-Paul II, in Vienna.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw M. Jackson Osborn
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,216
    As admirable as so many Habsburgs have been, with his having so many middle names, I'm tempted to think one of them must be 'Gambolputty'.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    I couldn't initially decide whether Keith or Bahnam stick out more as the most unlike the others, but Keith is his maternal great-grandfather's first name, and other is Arabic so it wins that peculiar palm.
  • StimsonInRehabStimsonInRehab
    Posts: 1,933
    His Royal Highness, Ferdinand Zvonimir Maria Balthus Keith . . .

    Keith?

    Keith.

    . . . Michael Otto Antal Bahnam Leonhard von Habsburg-Lothringen - is giving a ball!!!
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    The first name of his maternal grandmother's father, Rear Admiral Keith McNeil Campbell-Walter (1904-1976).
  • StimsonInRehabStimsonInRehab
    Posts: 1,933
    (Just to be clear, I was making a Rodgers and Hammerstein reference.)
    Thanked by 1Liam
  • PaxMelodious
    Posts: 440
    They stopped these crimes almost two hundred years ago,


    The Good Friday Agreement was reached in 1998. 2023-1998 = 25. Which is vastly less than 200.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,216
    In The Spectator's religion podcast, Damian Thompson devoted a program to discussing the relation of C3's coronation with the Catholic heritage:
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/podcast/how-protestant-is-the-coronation/
    Thanked by 3tomjaw ServiamScores CHGiffen
  • trowland87
    Posts: 15
    ICYMI, the score for the Vivats has been published online.


    I find it hilarious that there's no Latin equivalent of "Camilla".
  • Elmar
    Posts: 506
    'Camilla' is Latin already, meaning 'Camel'.
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,092
    Perhaps because the English took the Latin without modification - Camilla being the female form of the Latin cognomen, Camillus:

    https://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=2574
Add a Comment