Did the Queen act appropriately in the days following Diana's death?

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by wbenson

Isn't that from the Book of Common Prayer? If it is, they likely wouldn't have used it at Crathie, unless the Church of Scotland also uses it. (I don't know much about either church.)

I will put the link to the Scottish service again. This is the order that is used at Crathie and all CoS morning services.

A PRAYER FOR THE ROYAL FAMILY

ALMIGHTY God, the fountain of all goodness, we humbly beseech thee to bless Elizabeth the Queen Mother, Philip Duke of Edinburgh, Charles Prince of Wales, and all the Royal Family: Endue them with thy Holy Spirit; enrich them with thy heavenly grace; prosper them with all happiness; and bring them to thine everlasting kingdom; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

-

The following prayer may be said, for the Queen, the Royal Family, the Ministers of the Crown, the Parliament (when in session). and those in. Authority, instead of the prayers For the Queen's Majesty, For the Royal Family, and For the High Court of Parliament; but always either the following prayer, or those above noted, shall he used, together with the Prayer for the Clergy and People, the Prayer of Saint Chrysostom, and The Grace, unless the Litany be said.

O LORD God of our fathers, who rulest the nations of the earth: Most heartily we beseech thee with thy favour to behold our Sovereign Lady, Queen Elizabeth, that she may alwav incline to thy will and walk in thy way; and together with her bless Elizabeth the Queen Mother, Philip Duke of Edinburgh, Charles Prince of Wales, and all the Royal Family. Endue with wisdom the Ministers of the Crown, [the high Court of Parliament at this time assembled*,] and those who are set in authority over us, that all things may be so ordered and settled by their endeavours, that peace and happiness, truth and justice, religion and piety, may be established among us for all generations; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Scottish Book of Common Prayer

[MARG]

And that, as they say, is that! Many thanks Skydragon.

But what a legacy of wonderful words the Martyrs of the early churches left to us. The historical Liturgy of the CofE and the CofS is truely inspiring.

[GillW]

Originally Posted by Monika_

Gill, when the royals attend the services in Crathie, aren't their names mentioned? I believe they are and that is what makes this a different situation. If their names were not normally mentioned then it could be argued that it's not the way it's done, etc. However, in this particular case, if other members of the family are mentioned, it only magnifies the omission of Diana's name. I realize she was divorced from Charles, but she was the boys' mother...again, the boys the royals were putting first.

I'm not arguing with the original point you made, I understand that, I'm simply explaining why some people feel strongly about the omission of her name.

To the best of my recollection, the only royal mentioned by name was the Queen.

And, yes it was a Church of Scotland service and used a simple printed sheet rather than a prayer book service.

[Monika_]

Originally Posted by GillW

To the best of my recollection, the only royal mentioned by name was the Queen.
And, yes it was a Church of Scotland service and used a simple printed sheet rather than a prayer book service.

Thank you, Gill. If there is such a thing as perfect timing, I think you experienced it.

[sthreats]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

These are the set prayers and to my thinking there is nowhere to suddenly slip in Diana's name

I am Roman Catholic so I am not familar with the Anglican service. Thanks for the information.

There is no place for intentions from the congregation??

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by sthreats

I am Roman Catholic so I am not familar with the Anglican service. Thanks for the information.

There is no place for intentions from the congregation??

No, there is no similar thing in the CoE or CoS that I can think of. Over the years I have attended many a service and there has not, from what I remember, been a personal aspect included in any of them. Apart from a mention perhaps of a coffee morning to be held.

[Warren]

Posts discussing HM's attendance at Crathie and not releated to the death of Diana topic have been moved to The Queen's churchgoing habits thread.

[Skydragon]

The Royal Family have made their first public appearance since the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. On Thursday evening, the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry drove the short distance from Balmoral Castle to Craithie Church, for a remembrance service for Diana

http://www.bbc.co.uk/politics97/diana/family.html

[Menarue]

I notice that the article said that Balmoral Castle was a haven for the Princes and other members of the RF I imagine. They soon had to leave this haven to face , in my opinion,a crazed crowd. Poor young boys, even HM couldn´t protect them from the well-intentioned or just curious crowd of strangers, but she tried.

[Monika_]

I should think the RF has a 'haven' available to them whether they’re staying in Balmoral, Windsor, Sandringham, etc. I agree that protecting William and Harry was top priority, but it's not like the Queen was holding their hands 24/7 and wasn't able to do anything else. She has always been monarch first, then wife, mother, etc.

[Menarue]

The Queen was on holiday at Balmoral. That is the time she is officially off duty so she did have the time, if she had been allowed to, to spend with her bereaved grandsons.
At Windsor, at Buckingham Palace and official engagements she is monarch, but on holiday in Balmoral and Sandringham she can be herself, the mother, grandmother, aunt or whatever she wishes to be.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Monika_

. . . . . . . . but it's not like the Queen was holding their hands 24/7 and wasn't able to do anything else.

No, she didn't need to hold their hands 24/7 but, she and she alone dictated that the BRF would remain incommunicado as long as possible. She mandated that as a buffer between Balmoral and the world.

Originally Posted by monika

She has always been monarch first, then wife, mother, etc.

That is more than a little harsh and IMO inaccurate. If that were the case she would have acceded to Tony Blair's request that they all return to London posthaste. She was prepared to keep the family in private mourning until the actual funeral. Private mourning has nothing to do with being the Queen and, in this case, the "mother" and "grandmother" overrode the outrageous demands of the "public interest". She took the media heat for a stunned and grieving family.

[Monika_]

Originally Posted by MARG

That is more than a little harsh and IMO inaccurate. If that were the case she would have acceded to Tony Blair's request that they all return to London posthaste. She was prepared to keep the family in private mourning until the actual funeral. Private mourning has nothing to do with being the Queen and, in this case, the "mother" and "grandmother" overrode the outrageous demands of the "public interest". She took the media heat for a stunned and grieving family.

Well, HM is very dedicated and has always put the monarchy first. I did not mean it in a negative way.

As for outrageous demands, I beg to differ. IMO, it wasn't so much what the public 'demanded'; it was how the public reacted to the royals' silence. I've often wondered if things would have been calmer if Charles had issued a simple statement on behalf of himself and his sons...a simple message thanking the public for the "overwhelming outpouring of support at this time." Something along those lines... Had something like that been done, I don't think things would have escalated the way they did. You can't please everyone, I realize, but I think small gestures can go a long way.

[Skydragon]

They were outrageous demands, stirred up by the media trying to shift the blame. It is inconceivable that anyone would expect a grieving family to issue a statement or act in a certain way, I wonder how many would have thought 'put the public' first in the same situation?

The Royal Family put the boys first, as they should. They actually knew Diana as a person not just a 'celeb'. It must have been a tremendous shock to the entire family and the last people they should have to consider were the fickle public!

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

They were outrageous demands, stirred up by the media trying to shift the blame. It is inconceivable that anyone would expect a grieving family to issue a statement or act in a certain way, I wonder how many would have thought 'put the public' first in the same situation?

The Royal Family put the boys first, as they should. They actually knew Diana as a person not just a 'celeb'. It must have been a tremendous shock to the entire family and the last people they should have to consider were the fickle public!

Ah but you forget that the young ladies who had married into the family and then left it gave the public the view that the RF was cold and heartless so the public were unprepared for the fact that when one of said ladies died the RF would actually behave like a family and put the children of said woman first.

The press had gone along with that impression of the family and had demonised them for years for their 'coldness' etc based on the views expressed by these ladies (one more so than the other).

Now the press found itself as potentially the target so turned the people against the unfeeling and cold RF and low and behold the family didn't fit that image but actually behaved like a family first - they helped two truly grieving young boys cope with the death of their mother.

[Monika_]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

It is inconceivable that anyone would expect a grieving family to issue a statement or act in a certain way, I wonder how many would have thought 'put the public' first in the same situation?

Since most of us are private citizens, I suppose not many. But most of us don't make televised statements either. A move that would not have been necessary had a smaller gesture been done earlier, as in issuing a statement similar to the one I suggested.

Originally Posted by Skydragon

The Royal Family put the boys first, as they should. They actually knew Diana as a person not just a 'celeb'. It must have been a tremendous shock to the entire family and the last people they should have to consider were the fickle public!

I've read many comments where the Queen is accused of not caring about her former, non-royal daughter-in-law, and other times I read of a family's shock and grief? I'd say THAT is a bit fickle.

[Menarue]

I can dislike a person intensely, and furthermore have very good reasons for this dislike, but I would still be shocked and I must say grieved if that person was suddenly killed in a traffic accident.

[Skydragon]

Unless there is a statement from a reliable source or HM herself, I would find it hard to give any credence to such statements that she didn't care about her ex daughter in law. HM may not be a private citizen (according to some) but she is a human being, mother and grandmother.

Many bereaved families choose after a few days to speak to the press, but many more do not. It is not something they should even have to concern themselves with at such a time.

And yes, fickle public some of whom before the accident were all but worshiping the self proclaimed queen of hearts, rather than the real royal family.
---------------------
It seems the public wants a touchy feely Royal Familay, but that touchy feeliness is only to be directed at them!

[Monika_]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Unless there is a statement from a reliable source or HM herself, I would find it hard to give any credence to such statements that she didn't care about her ex daughter in law.

Actually, I was referring to statements made here, repeatedly.

Originally Posted by Skydragon

And yes, fickle public some of whom before the accident were all but worshiping the self proclaimed queen of hearts, rather than the real royal family.

People admired and respected the princess, yes, absolutely. 'Worship' is a good attempt to trivialize that fact. As for the 'real' royal family, well titles didn't matter in the end as far as the public was concerned, did it? And she was still William and Harry's REAL mother.

Titles and respect don't necessarily go hand in hand, but that is another thread.

[Carminha Stalker]

Bravo Monika. Couldn´t have said it better.