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
 
  #701  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:03 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
You may well be the only person who supports a monarch based on the current fact they are Supreme Governor of the Church of England. I can think of many who believe that particular distinction is a turn off from supporting the monarchy. They might well look at the monarchy in a better light with the religious role eliminated, especially since most of HMs subjects do not share the same faith.
Really, people are just clamouring to become royalists, except for the fact the Queen is Supreme Governor of the Church of England?

New one on me
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #702  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:06 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
So, as in so many other areas, the RC Church discriminates against other Christian faiths by not recognizing the marriage of a Catholic person to a non-Catholic if it is performed in another Christian faith, will not recognize the baptism of their child by another Christian faith as valid and will say such a childs "afterlife" is threatened??? How Christian of them.
Yes, hence "I was raised Catholic." But true faith is a calling that is hard to ignore. I was very glad my mother had her faith when she fell ill. It gave her the strength to die with dignity.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #703  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:16 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
Really, people are just clamouring to become royalists, except for the fact the Queen is Supreme Governor of the Church of England?

New one on me
Did I say clamouring??? I think not.
What I did suggest is that there are people who are turned off from the monarchy because of the religious linkage and they they may look more favourably (or perhaps less negatively if you prefer) if that religious linkage were removed.
Reply With Quote
  #704  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:24 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
Really, people are just clamouring to become royalists, except for the fact the Queen is Supreme Governor of the Church of England?

New one on me
Duke - I get your point. But Britain has become very diverse - as is Canada when you look at the entire country. Some cities, like Toronto are wonderful melting pots of culture. Not all in the pot see upholding the COE as a major motivator.

However Britain is not even so very churchy (Trends in UK Church attendance) these days. Without regard for the Queen's role - people do make their own faith based choices.
Reply With Quote
  #705  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:25 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,638
Ah the religious part of this legislation seems to really be as sticky as a piece of fly paper on a outhouse wall. The debates here are so interesting and I imagine they'd be quite as interesting when discussed by the legislators.

The first thing that comes to mind is that both the CoE and RCC put the same person as a basis of their entire belief system and that is Jesus Christ Himself.

Examining that fact, His words give a glimmer of perhaps how this should be handled. "Render unto Caeser the things that are Caeser's and render unto God the things that are God's".

As an outsider looking in, I have no solution or opinion on which way this all should be resolved, I just find it interesting to watch.
__________________
“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
  #706  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:31 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,444
Osipi - I think it is easier to watch this debate from the US - where we are raised on a steady diet separating Church and State. We know that drill. But here I am feeling the pain of my fellow forum members who know that Church and Ruler march together as one.
Reply With Quote
  #707  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
The change to the succession would have profound difficulties for a RC mother or father of a future British sovereign. That parent will have to watch their child be brought up in a religion that, as far as RCC teachings are concerned, inevitably means they're damned to an eternity of cohabitation with the devil himself. If nothing else, that would be pretty cruel for a RC parent.
Well since we don't really go in for forced marriages these days presumably the Catholic partner in the marriage would be aware of all of this and then exercise their God given free will to decide if their faith is more important that the person they believe they love and want to spend their lives with. If faith wins out no problem. If love wins out presumably they entered into the marriage with their eyes open. They option of conversion also remains open to them. I suppose they could just go to the local registry office and avoid religious complications.

Personally if God exists I doubt very much He/She care which club you go to in order to worship or if you go to any club at all if you are a believer.

As far as the changes proposed go I believe it will still require the monarch to be Anglican so the Catholic partner would be risking their childs birthright if it were baptised as RC and presumably this would have been considered before marrying and presumably the Anglican part of the marriage would have had their input as well into the childs faith.
Reply With Quote
  #708  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:45 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 775
The Bill has already been presented to Parliament so I don't know what you all blubbing on about. Solve the issue now instead of brushing it under the Carpet for another 60 years.
Reply With Quote
  #709  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:48 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
As far as the changes proposed go I believe it will still require the monarch to be Anglican so the Catholic partner would be risking their childs birthright if it were baptised as RC and presumably this would have been considered before marrying and presumably the Anglican part of the marriage would have had their input as well into the childs faith.
In practical terms, I cannot see it becoming a serious issue. Would the heir or someone very close in line really be likely to allow themselves to form the sort of close relationship with a dedicated Roman Catholic that could lead to them seriously considering marriage?
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #710  
Old 01-08-2013, 08:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,186
Can someone explain the point of having a sovereign in 2013 if the very reason we have the House of Hanover is to uphold the Reformed Protestant Faith.
Call me old fashioned but when someone takes an oath, they should uphold it.
To many monarchists , the office of sovereign is a holy office and to like minded people we do not follow the latest fashions or whatever hairstyle Catherine is rocking. It is a religious office

To me the office is holy and divine and HM is styled as thus for a reason. Her Most Excellent Majesty Elizabeth The Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Sovereign of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, whom may God preserve and bless with long life, health and honour and all worldly happiness
Reply With Quote
  #711  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:00 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
To me the office is holy and divine and HM is style as thus for a reason. Her Most Excellent Majesty Elizabeth The Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Sovereign of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, whom may God preserve and bless with long life, health and honour and all worldly happiness
When I was still a monarchist, this was a part of HM's title that I, being an atheist, chose to ignore.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #712  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:03 PM
EIIR's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Somewhere, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,658
The heart often rules the head. It's pretty easy to see a scenario where a RC marries into the RF, accepting the succession rules but whose feelings on the matter may well change. That royal will be sitting in mass, or attending confession, basically being told that their Anglican child is doomed to eternal damnation. That couldn't be easy to live with.

I'm somewhat shocked at the flippant manner in which some say that it's obvious that the CoE should be disestablished, along with the removal of the monarch's traditional role as supreme governor. To do so would be to basically rip the British constitution, many centuries in the making, to shreds. This would not be a cosmetic change, it would require an overhaul of the entire British state. Such enormous changes are generally something that the British people view with a healthy skepticism.

Last year the Queen herself articulated what the established church has done for the UK:

Quote:
Addressing the gathering, the Queen said the Church of England had "gently and assuredly" created an environment for other faith communities and people of no faith to live freely.
"Woven into the fabric of this country, the Church has helped to build a better society - more and more in active co-operation for the common good with those of other faiths."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17047885

To my mind, the present setup works pretty well in the UK. There is no perfect system of government or constitutional architecture. Any changes to the British constitution need to be considered in a measured and careful manner. In other words, the opposite to what Calamity Clegg has done.
Reply With Quote
  #713  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:04 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
When I was still a monarchist, this was a part of HM's title that I, being an atheist, chose to ignore.
You're also a republican now. So it shouldn't matter what HM is style as.
Reply With Quote
  #714  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:06 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,385
Here is Nick Clegg's response to PRince Charles - I find (in the written text of the article) his example of James I marriage to Anne of Denmark ineresting, as opposed to Jamess II marriage to MAry of Modena - and we know what happened next!

I'd be interested in views on the comment about Louis XIVth of France.


Nick Clegg dismisses Prince Charles' fears on royal laws - Telegraph#
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #715  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:12 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,822
The Queeen is no more queen "By the Grace of God", than anyone is anything in their job. This is just hooey that they guy with the biggest sword, promulgated, so that when he ruled, he was respected and feared. This is how the queen got her job. She was born to the right family. Her ancestors, ruled by might and fear and used God. A monarch in any country could be any religion that exists there and a state church is ridiculous in this day and age. God doesn't hover over any one church, he is there for all, if you believe. The rest is man made nonsense to create an awe of strength and "divine right". All that has become a non-starter in the 21st century.
Reply With Quote
  #716  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:14 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,186
Charles is an Anglican, William is more of an Anglican than his father and William's children will be Anglican. After that the whole institution will worship at the Mosque of England , so really its a moot point.
Reply With Quote
  #717  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:20 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 3,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
You're also a republican now. So it shouldn't matter what HM is style as.
I might be a republican, but the British monarch is still my Head of State, and here her title is: "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth."

I was wrong in saying it was only as a monarchist that I chose to ignore it; I still choose to ignore it. And I am quite sure that there are plenty of fellow atheists and secular humanists, and members of other religions, in the UK and other Realms, and maybe even practising Anglicans, who do not like the connection between Church and State and would favour disestablishment.
__________________
"That's it then. Cancel the kitchen scraps for lepers and orphans, no more merciful beheadings, -- and call off Christmas!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #718  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:22 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
Can someone explain the point of having a sovereign in 2013 if the very reason we have the House of Hanover is to uphold the Reformed Protestant Faith.
Call me old fashioned but when someone takes an oath, they should uphold it.
To many monarchists , the office of sovereign is a holy office and to like minded people we do not follow the latest fashions or whatever hairstyle Catherine is rocking. It is a religious office

To me the office is holy and divine and HM is styled as thus for a reason. Her Most Excellent Majesty Elizabeth The Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, Sovereign of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, whom may God preserve and bless with long life, health and honour and all worldly happiness
Somehow I very much doubt that the people who gathered along the Thames to watch the Jubilee boat parade or who gathered in the Mall waiting for HM to appear on the balcony thought they were looking at a Holy personage or a religious figure. They gathered to show their love/respect/admiration for the Queen of the United Kingdom who reigns By The Grace of The People. The monarch exists to be the living, non political, symbol of the nation and its history.
Reply With Quote
  #719  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:27 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,186
^^^^ Your opinion and I respect it but I disagree
Reply With Quote
  #720  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:29 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 775
This thread has become to political for my liking.
__________________

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 beatrice borromeo best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit best outfit 2016 catherine middleton style coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events dom duarte duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll felipe vi grand duchess josephine-charlotte grand duke jean greece 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 picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles princess charlene fashion princess madeleine 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 royal fashion september 2016 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 07:50 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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