The Queen should have made way for Charles before. No one wants an old king in our cult of youth. It is as if she wants to spoil things for him.
Compare and contrast the British monarch with the Dutch. The old monarch would stand aside for the son with an attractive wife and family, to give his sails a good wind.
If you wanted to preserve the monarchy, this is what you would do, since you are nothing more than a ornament, after all, or at the most a living exhibit of the most recent iteration of your royal ancestors.
Once the monarchy is abolished the Anglican Church will logically and necessarily be disestablished.
Christianity, already a walking corpse, will then finally die and be finally replaced by a religion fit for the purpose of maintaining morality, requiring that a nation's laws be in harmony with its morality.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19876372 seems an infinitely better way of choosing our leaders than the system we have now, which only allows us access to a succession of fools and knaves. If there were a grammar school in every borough, the quality and range of possible leaders of the future would be even wider and better. This proposal will predictably be blocked by MPs who pay school fees not wanting the children of the hoi polloi competing with their children, but since when did our MPs ever consider the national interest in anything they do? While the Chinese Communist Party at least requires its members to promote the national interest, the British remain clueless as to what that might be.