I never met Queen Elizabeth II but I know many who have and a handful may read this.
They recall their moments with the queen with humour and pleasure; the queen’s humour and their pleasure. They met their monarch and she revealed to them her private side and it was the same as her public side. Unlike the rest of us she never lost her temper. Unlike some Prime Ministers and some heads of state she did not throw telephones or assassinate her enemies.
When I was a boy walking up snipe in Ireland there were shaky bogs. They were the ones that quivered beneath the gum boot and unless care was taken I’d be up to my ears in a morass. I am on a shaky bog again. I do not think British monarchs should be head of the church – archbishops and popes are usually a slightly better bet. However, Queen Elizabeth proved me wrong. She was a spiritual and moral guide, unwavering in her Christian faith, to her subjects. The fact that many of them are not of her religion does not diminish her as an example to all of us and it is for that I hope she will be remembered and cherished.
Christopher,
The late Queen Elizabeth was not ‘head of the church’, she was head of the Church of England (there is a salient distinction). The exclusive head of the church is Jesus Christ (see Colossians 1:18 et al) and this is something The Queen clearly acknowledged. I am, however, very pleased you made mention of Her Majesty’s Christian faith. This was most apparent in The Queens Christmas broadcasts when she spoke most candidly about her trust in Almighty God. The Queen understood that her authority was not conferred by Parliament, nor inherited from her earthly father, but came from God, and it was to Him that she would be ultimately accountable.
By any measure, The Queen was a most remarkable woman. She never attended university, yet she was adviser and confidante to numerous Prime Ministers. A nonagenarian who was working more than 40 hours per week. She employed some 1200 people, yet fed her own dogs. She could rebuild a 6-cylinder, 3462cc engine of an Austin K2 Ambulance. She could trek for hours on a fell pony across the windswept Highland moors, yet still look poised and elegant in the diamond Kokoshink tiara. She was the most famous woman in the world, but was temperamentally rural, and content with the simple pleasures life afforded.
Elizabeth II has consistently, winsomely and publicly honoured the God she served and has been an extraordinary example of unstinting, persevering, life-affirming, generous service.
Eternal rest grant unto Her, O LORD, and may light perpetual shine upon Her.
Hibernophile’s earlier comment says, “The Queen understood that her authority was not conferred by Parliament, nor inherited from her earthly father, but came from God, and it was to Him that she would be ultimately accountable.” His notions seem flawed on several fronts.
In particular, I rather doubt that our constitutional understanding, let alone the late Queen’s, was that her authority came from God. The anointing in the coronation ceremony may once have implied that, but surely the thought died with the divine right of Kings and The Glorious Revolution of 1688.
We have of course a modern, properly British muddle or mystery. Yes, the 1953 coronation speaks in Old Testament terms of Zadok the priest and of the Queen as God’s “chosen servant” who is now “consecrated.” But much religious practice is uttered with a sort of fingers-crossed behind the back lack of literal belief. Surely, the modern established church anoints monarchs with holy oil and prayers, but more with hopes of God’s blessings on them than a belief it is conferring God’s authority? The Queen’s authority really did depend on her hereditary succession, her oaths of dutifulness, and on secular constitutional understandings. Crucially, it depended on the public’s willing suspension of disbelief. Many and perhaps most people rather splendidly seem to need to feel themselves part of something which is not a soap opera, nor a Disney film or fairy tale, but a mystery. They feel it reaches a part of them which doesn’t make obvious sense but is valuable.
Few of her subjects were as religious as the late Queen, but her faithfulness seemed to be at our service anyway. The Queen was doubtless prayerful and felt herself accountable to God. But I don’t suppose she thought herself God-given. She seemed to understand that her family must constantly renew the odd contract they have with their subjects. I certainly don’t suppose she imagined that if the monarchy were ever secularised God would feel vastly affronted.