The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #561  
Old 01-02-2013, 11:45 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,197
There was never any intention that Camilla woudn't be carrying out royal duties.

The 'intention' of being Princess Consort was purely and simply to appease the Diana fanatics.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #562  
Old 01-02-2013, 11:52 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There was never any intention that Camilla woudn't be carrying out royal duties.

The 'intention' of being Princess Consort was purely and simply to appease the Diana fanatics.
I have always believed this to be the case, but it has been suggested that Camilla does not want to be Queen and only finally agreed to marry Charles if she did not have to be Queen. Do you think this is possible, Bertie, and that the decision that she will be Princess Consort was a happy co-incidence that suited everyone (except those of us who feel she should be Queen)?
__________________

__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #563  
Old 01-03-2013, 12:03 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Campbelltown, Australia
Posts: 97
Is there a prohibition against the Duchess being Queen Consort due to her divorce from her first husband? Does that factor here? This may have already been asked and answered. Sorry if it has.
Reply With Quote
  #564  
Old 01-03-2013, 12:21 AM
Queen Camilla's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,861
I just said the intent might have been for Camilla not to perform any royal duties.

I personally always thought that was the case, that she would be Charles' wife with the benefits of a spouse and without the benefits/obligations of royality. Similar to Tim.
Reply With Quote
  #565  
Old 01-03-2013, 12:32 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
Is there a prohibition against the Duchess being Queen Consort due to her divorce from her first husband? Does that factor here? This may have already been asked and answered. Sorry if it has.
I am not absolutely sure, but I suspect that what occurred during the Service of Prayer and Thanksgiving, or whatever it was officially called, that took place after the marriage cured any problems that might have existed with the Church, and thus with Camilla becoming Queen, because Camilla had a previous husband still living. I think this part of the service did the trick:

"All say:
ALMIGHTY God, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Maker of all things, Judge of all men: We acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness, Which we, from time to time, most grievously have committed, By thought, word, and deed, Against thy Divine Majesty, Provoking most justly thy wrath and indignation against us. We do earnestly repent, And are heartily sorry for these our misdoings; The remembrance of them is grievous unto us; The burden of them is intolerable. Have mercy upon us, have mercy upon us, most merciful Father; For thy Son our Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, Forgive us all that is past; And grant that we may ever hereafter Serve and please thee In newness of life, To the honour and glory of thy name; Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Archbishop:
ALMIGHTY God, our heavenly Father, who of his great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them that with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto him: Have mercy upon you; pardon and deliver you from all your sins; confirm and strengthen you in all goodness; and bring you to everlasting life; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. OGOD our Father, who by thy holy Apostle hast taught us that love is the fulfilling of the law; Grant to these thy servants that, loving one another, they may continue in thy love unto their lives’ end; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, one God world without end. Amen."

Though this is, of course, completely off topic!
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #566  
Old 01-03-2013, 01:00 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,197
Having a living ex-husband didn't stop Eleanor of Aquaitaine from being Queen Consort and her ex-husband was King of France and she had two daughters from that marriage.

There has never been a bar on having a living ex-husband in law. There was a social stigma attached to being divorced in earlier times to the point where neither party could even be presented at court (Albert was very strict on that matter).

The CoE gave the marriage its blessing in a formal, public ceremony and they both admitted that they had done wrong (the general confession above from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer) with the general absolution given (of course only God knows how penitent any person is in their hearts when they say those words and no doubt there will be some here and elsewhere who won't believe that these two were penitent but I do and only God can grant absolution - which is what the Archbishop's prayer is - asking God to forgive the sinners). The Archbishop then said the second prayer which was in essence the Church acknowledging their love blessed that love.
Reply With Quote
  #567  
Old 01-03-2013, 01:04 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
Is there a prohibition against the Duchess being Queen Consort due to her divorce from her first husband? Does that factor here? This may have already been asked and answered. Sorry if it has.
No the Duchess' divorce is not relevant to whether or not she can become Queen. As has been pointed out, as the wife of a King she will be Queen however she is known unless Parliament enacts legislation removing the status either as part of a general review of titles (as suggested by the LibDem MP) or to specifically deny it to her and nobody else - which seems rather mean spirited.

I've read on here a few times that Camilla refused to marry Charles if she was to become Queen and I was wondering where the source of this information has come from. It really makes no sense that she would reject being Queen unless it was to assuage the Diana fanatics. Whether she is called the Queen or the Princess Consort she will be carrying out/filling exactly the same role. As far as I can see the only difference is that she would not be crowned.
Reply With Quote
  #568  
Old 01-03-2013, 02:14 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,676
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
I've read on here a few times that Camilla refused to marry Charles if she was to become Queen and I was wondering where the source of this information has come from. It really makes no sense that she would reject being Queen unless it was to assuage the Diana fanatics. Whether she is called the Queen or the Princess Consort she will be carrying out/filling exactly the same role. As far as I can see the only difference is that she would not be crowned.
From what I gathered, when Charles and Camilla started thinking marriage, Camilla was unsure of herself doing public engagements. Perhaps at that time and never having been in the royal spotlight publically, she had her fears and doubts. I know it would scare the heck out of me for sure.. especially as an older woman. Since the marriage, as we've seen, Camilla has done brilliantly in her roles as a working royal. Perhaps she's even warmed to the idea of being being Charles' Queen. Only time will tell.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #569  
Old 01-03-2013, 07:46 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 18
Re the lady who did not wish to use her husband's title-I believe Lady Diana Cooper placed an announcement in the Times ot the effect that she did not wish to be known as Viscountess Norwich but would continue as " Lady Diana Cooper"
Reply With Quote
  #570  
Old 01-03-2013, 12:42 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There was never any intention that Camilla woudn't be carrying out royal duties.

The 'intention' of being Princess Consort was purely and simply to appease the Diana fanatics.
By the time Charles takes the throne, which might not be for another 15 years, Diana will have been gone for 30. I think she will take the title of Queen after all the years of public service in which she has been engaged.
Reply With Quote
  #571  
Old 01-03-2013, 12:44 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 18,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Camilla View Post
Since the new rules are to take effect with the child of William & Kate. It makes sense to leave Camilla as Queen Camilla and Kate to become Princess Consort.
Makes no sense at all. Queen Camilla, Queen Catherine that's how it should go.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #572  
Old 01-03-2013, 12:49 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Makes no sense at all. Queen Camilla, Queen Catherine that's how it should go.
Precisely.
There is absolutely no sense in changing the law, be it for Camilla (Charles' reign) or Kate (William's reign). If they are hell-bent to introduce equality among male and female spouses of the Monarch, why not create a title King Consort? It certainly makes more sense than the Princess Consort nonsense.
Reply With Quote
  #573  
Old 01-03-2013, 01:37 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 2,533
The objections to Camilla being crowned Queen of course stem from her relationship with Charles during his marriage to Diana. My opinion is why exclude Camilla for something Charles did as well, and was arguably the more culpable party as he was the one who broke his marriage vows to Diana (my understanding of Camilla's marriage is that her husband had strayed long before). Given all of this, why should Charles be crowned King and Camilla relegated to an inferior position? To me it's a modern day re-telling of The Scarlet Letter.

When Charles is King, Camilla will legally be Queen. She should be known as Queen because to do otherwise is to punish her for their affair but give him pass.
Reply With Quote
  #574  
Old 01-03-2013, 05:12 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Felica View Post
Re the lady who did not wish to use her husband's title-I believe Lady Diana Cooper placed an announcement in the Times ot the effect that she did not wish to be known as Viscountess Norwich but would continue as " Lady Diana Cooper"
Thank you so much for posting that, Felicia. The woman I had in mind is someone younger, but this is very interesting information and has given me another interesting woman to research.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #575  
Old 01-03-2013, 05:23 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,186
A daughter for Will and Kate could create a royal headache - Canada - Macleans.ca
Quote:
Is there perhaps a silent prayer sweeping stealthily across the ranks of Canada’s constitutional experts? “Please, Lord, let the Duchess of Cambridge be delivered of a fine, healthy heir. And if you could see to it, let it be a boy. Or, if it’s a girl, make sure she only has younger sisters.”
Its not a done deal yet.
Reply With Quote
  #576  
Old 01-03-2013, 05:44 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post
Precisely.
There is absolutely no sense in changing the law, be it for Camilla (Charles' reign) or Kate (William's reign). If they are hell-bent to introduce equality among male and female spouses of the Monarch, why not create a title King Consort? It certainly makes more sense than the Princess Consort nonsense.
As tempting as this might seem, I can't see this as a realistic possibility. The words "King" and "Consort" just don't work together. The meaning of King and Queen is far too entrenched in history and tradition and usage to be changed this way.

I see three alternatives: (a) retain the status quo, with occasional tweaks at the edges in response to social change (e.g. the change regarding primogeniture); (b) make all Consorts Prince or Princess Consort; or, (c) completely revise the whole system.

I think it's safe to say that (c) is not going to happen. (b) might, and is my preferred option, but people seem to like the idea of having a Queen too much, so it's probably not going to happen, so the male spouse of a female monarch will continue to be discriminated against. As I raised in a previous post, I'd love to know Prince Philip's thoughts on the issue. (a) is the course of least resistance, and what will probably happen.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #577  
Old 01-03-2013, 06:32 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
It's always "easier" to continue centuries old discrimination than to end it. (see final paragraph of the article). My own country has lots of experience with this right up to and including my current President. Shame on us.
I am an outsider to the Commonwealth and am only expressing an outsider's opinion. I think it would interesting to watch the world reaction to any of the Commonwealth nations not agreeing with the change. Realistically - the rest of the world will see one republic or the other which decides to remain old fashioned because it is "easier".
It would seem quite silly from the outside to see Great Britain ruled by "Queen Eldest Offspring" while Republic B chooses to ignore said girl and select "King Younger Brother." All that while PMs and legislatures are actually running the two republics. What would be gained by Republic B by doing so - certainly not moral high ground because at base, the issue is trying to stop discrimination.
Again - I'm an outsider to the Commonwealth and am giving one outsider opinion - which I realize matters not at all. Except that it is true.
Reply With Quote
  #578  
Old 01-03-2013, 07:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,272
^^^^^
The republics within the Commonwealth have no say in the issue. It is only the realms within the Commonwealth that HM is monarch of, like Canada, that have a say in the matter.
Reply With Quote
  #579  
Old 01-03-2013, 07:24 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Campbelltown, Australia
Posts: 97
And as a citizen of a Commonwealth country that has anti-discrimination laws, I would welcome the change that would mean eldest would inherit regardless of gender. I would posit that it should go further, ie other hereditary titles as well.
Reply With Quote
  #580  
Old 01-03-2013, 07:32 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,418
Interesting, Duke-of-Earl. As many of us said when this was first raised, we have knee-jerk politicans pushing through legislation without a clue about how the consitution of the commonwealth works.

In reality, we have as long as it takes because it could be retrospective.

Of course it will be interesting if the Duchess has boy/girl twins. Conspiracy theorists will be in the wings!
__________________

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Change of the Act of Succession - 1979 Constitution Change GrandDuchess Royal House of Sweden 455 07-19-2015 09:05 AM
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royals 942 03-09-2015 11:32 PM
Prince Frederik and Princess Mary's Official Visit to Australia: November 19-26, 2011 Princess Robijn Crown Prince Frederik, Crown Princess Mary and Family 295 08-28-2014 09:34 PM
Prince Frederik and Princess Mary's Official Visit to Brazil: September 16-21, 2012 ricarda Crown Prince Frederik, Crown Princess Mary and Family 81 10-05-2012 05:15 PM
The Third Succession Act (Henry VIII, 1543) Daz_Voz British Royal History 4 07-25-2012 04:17 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary's work for women's rights crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch state visit e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece hereditary grand duchess stéphanie's fashion & style jubilee kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament oscars picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess marie princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen rania daytime fashion royal fashion september 2016 sheikha mozah's fashion state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:40 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises