Usually, the rot begins at the top.
Reformation Testimony Garnet Milne reformationtestimony.org.nz
Usually, the rot begins at the top.
When Charles and Camilla rule over us “happy and glorious” it may put paid to Labour’s plans to usher in a republic with Helen as President. Patently, the couple were very happy and Mrs Parker Bowles is reported to have revealed that the prince went down on one knee to propose.
She added: "I'm just coming down to earth," perhaps meaning that she and Charles had just returned from a ski trip in the Swiss Alps. After all, one cannot expect a near pensioner to be on cloud nine, when the happy couple have known one another for thirty years. That knowledge was not only concerning the colour tights they both wear to polo matches, for their knowledge has been thoroughly carnal for many a moon. The now deceased princess of Wales had even observed that Camilla was the third person in their marriage.
The plain facts are that both Charles and Camilla are adulterers and fornicators who cheated on their respective spouses and who have been living together as “partners” for a considerable period.
This is of course unremarkable given the moral climate of Western civilisation, but we should not overlook sinful behaviour just because the sinners in question happen to be among the rich and famous. More to the point is the role both will play in relation to New Zealand.
One of the great strengths of the present Queen of New Zealand has been her upright life which has admitted not even a hint of scandal. Queen Elizabeth has been exemplary as a wife and mother and we can only be grateful that she has always maintained high moral standards.
If she abdicates or dies and Charles is elevated to the throne of England, and New Zealand, we will be getting a king whose moral standards fit very comfortably with the present Labour government. Adultery and fornication are hardly matters that concern our political masters. Indeed, government sponsored sex education promotes sex outside of marriage; and if the poor 13 year old gets pregnant she can have an abortion arranged through her school and doctor without mum and dad knowing a thing about it.
Charles is not only very compatible with the gutter morality of our present government who have foisted homosexual marriage and legalised prostitution upon us, just to name two of Labour’s “achievements”, but the prince is also on exactly the same religious wave length as our universalist “tolerateeverythingbarbiblicalChristianity” political comrades.
The Royal personage carries a title “defender of the faith”, given by a pope to Henry VIII. The pope certainly did not have in mind modern Anglicanism, or ancient Anglicanism for that matter as the faith Henry was to defend.
Once when asked about his views on carrying the title defender of the faith, Charles famously replied that he preferred the title to be truncated somewhat to the “defender of faith”. It is not only the definite article that is missing; humility and integrity are also absent in Charles’ answer. While I disagree entirely with the British system which makes the Queen and one day Charles the head of the Church of England (Christ alone is the head of the church), had Charles one ounce of decency, he would admit that he is not a Christian and therefore does not have any intention to “contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3).
Charles is either 1. a Buddhist; 2. a Hindu; 3. a Muslim; 4. a worshipper of Gaia or 5. all of the above. I will let you decide. But Charles’ religious views are not only his problem. If the church over which he is to be head one day (though disbelieving virtually all its articles of belief) promises to bless the union between Charles and Camilla, as the Archbishop of Canterbury has indeed promised, the church becomes complicit in Charles’ and Camilla’s sin. Since they have openly admitted their adultery; the church should have dealt with that matter and required public repentance so that forgiveness could then be possible. But in ignoring the adultery and then the fornication of these two pillars of the community, the Archbishop and the Anglican Church have demonstrated that they are not at all concerned about the sinfulness of sin, and the end of sinners who do not repent of their sin and trust in Christ alone. What hypocrisy it will be to give this church blessing in the name of Christ, when these two aging adulterers have thumbed their nose at the teaching of Christ almost all their adult life.
Anyone familiar with the New Zealand government and the public religion they promote will agree that Charles and Camilla will slot into the role of King and consort very easily. I would not be surprised if our political leaders, who are the most political correct bunch on the planet earth, decided to ban the words adultery, fornication and de facto from the New Zealand vocabulary. This could be a wise move, because the way would then be clear to upgrade Camilla from being a just a consort to being a real queen. This would not be confusing, because in spite of what the butler claimed, Charles cannot be a queen himself; otherwise he would not be marrying a member of the opposite sex. As queen Camilla could have a great time in New Zealand. She could sign some paintings as if she had painted them and sell them off for charity. This act of deep humility would elevate her mana down under.
If she likes a tipple and gets caught with excess blood alcohol, that would also be a minor problem. We overlook those sorts of things here in New Zealand and she could discretely go on holiday to Australia for a while and then return to her job as if nothing had happened.
And if she has a criminal record, she can even get her record wiped out and start off with a clean slate. Charles and Camilla could settle in a nice villa in one of our classier suburbs and feel right at home. Hunting with the hounds has not been banned here yet, but more importantly when the “happy and glorious” couple attend one of the PM’s dinners they will not have to decide which god they have to thank for the meal since Helen has outlawed grace. This will mean embarrassments will be avoided and the defender of faith will be able to maintain his magnanimous stance that all religions lead to heaven.
We need to ask what Christ and His prophets would think of such a union which has been sprung upon the world and which managed to relegate to page 2 North Korea’s brave announcement that they possess atomic bombs. John the Baptist was not slow to criticise Herod who was openly committing adultery. John lost his head, but he maintained his integrity and was translated to heaven’s glory. The Lord Jesus Christ was told by the Pharisees that Herod wished to kill Christ.
He responded by calling Herod what he was, a fox – a low-life who stole other people’s hens. And he told those Pharisees to go back and tell Herod that He was going to continue to fight Satan and evil and bring his gospel of spiritual healing in spite of the antipathy of his political rulers.
Faithful Christians will follow in Christ’s footsteps and continue to highlight and rebuke the sin of public officials who foolishly think that they can ignore the One True God. Why highlight sin? It is not because we claim to be perfect ourselves. Rather it is so that by God’s grace others may see their sin and their need for Christ as their Saviour. “Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful” (Pr 27:6).