So IMHO she simply wanted to respect her
husband's heritage and did what she could do to protect it.
That was my understanding.
Just a thought do you think in years to come when William is on the throne he will carry out some engagements (thinking her could be 50-60 by then) on behalf of William. William and Harry are going to need support in there future roles.
Also, I am of the Episcopal Church (Church Of England in the USA) - it's not much different from the Catholic Church. We just don't recognize the Pope.
Shouldn't be too much of a switch for Autumn.
Although from what I gather she isn't a practising Catholic - it was confirmed that she was christened, but no mention of First Holy Communion and Confirmation. So it might be that she was only catholic because that's where her parents chose to have her baptised. So this may not be a big decision.
So, what about Autumn's heritage? I'm rather disappointed in her for doing this.
Although from what I gather she isn't a practising Catholic - it was confirmed that she was christened, but no mention of First Holy Communion and Confirmation. So it might be that she was only catholic because that's where her parents chose to have her baptised. So this may not be a big decision.
She is reported as having said that she was "very proud of her religion" which would rather indicate that she was practising.
I think her decision is shameful. It strikes me that she's not terribly religious to begin with, or she would not have so (seemingly) casually thrown aside her religious heritage.
Again, the ugly Act of Settlement rears its head again. If she were Presbyterian, Zoroasterian, Buddhist, etc., it wouldn't have mattered at all.
And for those who are "ostracized" within the Royal Family because of their different faith -- what a disgrace. I expect more out of a family that once prided itself on ruling an empire on which the sun never sat, and which was populated by a majority of non-Anglicans.
Legally speaking, consider whether Ms. Kelly's renunciation is indeed effective enough?
According to at least one canon lawyer who blogged this news item today, it's not necessarily clear that from the perspective of Roman Catholic canon law that the renunciation is complete enough. At the very least, it's an interesting perspective, regardless of what it actually means practically.
In the Light of the Law: Autumn Kelly: making the wrong choice for the wrong reason
http://clsa.org/content/files/USCCB_memo_2006_0405.pdf
!
I don't think she could have been a practicing Catholic as, IMHO anyone who is active within their faith would never be pursuaded to dump it for any reason at all, let alone for convenience.angela said:I really have lost all respect for her. I was very vocal in my admiration for her (as I understood it) joint Anglican/Catholic wedding as I saw her as a girl who was proud to stand by how she was raised and what she believed in.
If she was Christened a Roman Catholic but had never "practiced her faith", conversion would make it easier with regard to children etc. As to status, Peter Phillips will always be "The Queen's Grandson", become "The King's Nephew", and eventually "The King's First Cousin". That being the case, nothing is changed.angela said:As it is, I don't see her "conversion" as representing a great new found love of the COE but as something more calculating ie keeping Peter's place in the line of succesion.
And, there is no way on earth that you could convince me that anyone doing business with him is ignorant of his lineage!pamk said:Peter is in business - banking, I think - and a title would certainly add a lot of cache to his working life.
Unkind, and most probably untrue.angela said:Autumn, you are pathetic!
Faith is a very personal matter. No one has a right to question anybody's decisions about this personal matter. I assume that Ms. Kelly has got her serious reasons for converting to another faith. I for one think that she shows respect to her husband's family traditions. I do not understand what the outrage is about.
I really have lost all respect for her. I was very vocal in my admiration for her (as I understood it) joint Anglican/Catholic wedding as I saw her as a girl who was proud to stand by how she was raised and what she believed in. As it is, I don't see her "conversion" as representing a great new found love of the COE but as something more calculating ie keeping Peter's place in the line of succesion. Autumn, you are pathetic!
i highly doubt her beliefs have changed as the CoE and the Catholic church share many of the same beliefs.