Calls to pledge allegiance to the King dubbed 'offensive, tone-deaf'
Archbishop Justin Welby plans on asking all British people to kneel in a show of allegiance to the British Monarch King Charles III on his coronation on May 6.
Republicans in the UK bash Archbishop Justin Welby's plan, dubbed "Homage of the People" as "offensive" and "tone-deaf" after he rehauled the coronation process to include all British people, pledging their allegiance to King Charles III on May 6.
Historically, the oath to swear allegiance and kneel before the King has been preserved for British nobility, however, the recent announcement by Welby, who will lead the proceedings on May 6 at Westminster Abbey, expands the traditional "Homage of Peers" oath to include all citizens of nations of which King Charles acts as head of state.
The Archbishop will call on "all persons of goodwill in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of the other realms and the territories to make their homage, in heart and voice, to their undoubted king, defender of all."
The order of service will read: "All who so desire, in the abbey, and elsewhere, say together: I swear that I will pay true allegiance to Your Majesty, and to your heirs and successors according to law. So help me God."
British Members of Parliament, as well as Canadians, swear allegiance to the British Monarch when they take office.
The plot to call on the British public to pledge their allegiance to the King on May 6 has been slammed as "offensive, tone-deaf and a gesture that holds the people in contempt" by Republic, an anti-royalist group.
A spokesperson for Republic Graham Smith pointed out that "in a democracy, it is the head of state who should be swearing allegiance to the people, not the other way around."
Republic says that 1,400 people have pledged to join the protest after controversies were stirred up due to the issue of public financing of the King's Coronation.
Public polls found that 51% of the respondents believe that the event should not be publicly funded while a lesser group of 32% said the royal family should have access to public funds.