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
 
  #861  
Old 08-21-2012, 11:07 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,427
That is correct - since Henry VII, except for the Act of Settlement passing over 58 people and William having the throne in his own right after the death of his wife (yes I know he shared it with her) it has gone with male preference with no problems

Henry VII - son (Henry VIII) - son (Edward VI) - elder sister (Mary I) - younger sister (Elizabeth) - eldest son of cousin (James I and VI) - son (Charles I) - son (Charles II) - brother (James II and VII) - daughter and husband (William III and Mary II) - sister/sister-in-law (Anne) - descendent of younger Stuart line (George I) - son (George II) - grandson (George III) - son (George IV) - brother (William IV) - neice (Victoria) - son (Edward VII) - son (George V) - son (Edward VIII) - brother (George VI) - daughter (Elizabeth II).
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #862  
Old 08-22-2012, 12:46 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Singapore, Singapore
Posts: 73
BTW, I'd like to raise a glass to George I for having so _many_ descendants! Including most of the crowned heads of Europe.

Did a damn sight better than Henry "6 wives, no grandchildren" VIII.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #863  
Old 08-22-2012, 02:20 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daz_Voz View Post
BTW, I'd like to raise a glass to George I for having so _many_ descendants! Including most of the crowned heads of Europe.

Did a damn sight better than Henry "6 wives, no grandchildren" VIII.
Different time, different lifestyle.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #864  
Old 08-22-2012, 07:49 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Singapore, Singapore
Posts: 73
Quote:
It does make sense though, that the monarch should belong to the Church of England, as he or she also is the head of said church. But his or her consort should be able to belong to another religion, even the Roman-Catholic church.
Furienna, note though that the Act of Settlement does _not_ require the Monarch to belong to the Church of England.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #865  
Old 08-22-2012, 08:42 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,427
Not true:

Clause III

That whosoever shall hereafter come to the Possession of this Crown shall joyn in Communion with the Church of England as by Law established
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #866  
Old 08-22-2012, 09:59 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Any Protestant who marries a Catholic has to promise to raise the children Catholic (unless Church laws recently changed). Those who do not do this, like Princess Michael of Kent, are not following Church law, and it would be very uncomfortable to have a royal spouse of a monarch in a similarly compromised position. Therefore the present efforts to change the law of Settlement probably will fail, or there will be no "takers" by Catholics asked to marry an heir. This is why many of the "royal" brides of Europe are ineligible to marry Prince Harry unless he converts and leaves both Church and Monarchy. Unless the rules of the Catholic Church changed recently.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #867  
Old 08-23-2012, 02:05 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
There is always the possibility of a dispens. Quite some catholic Royal brides married protestant rulers or heirs and had their children raised as protestants. A tradition that goes back right to the times of the reformation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #868  
Old 08-25-2012, 09:00 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Singapore, Singapore
Posts: 73
Quote:
BTW, I'd like to raise a glass to George I for having so _many_ descendants! Including most of the crowned heads of Europe.
Having thrown this out there, I was interested to check the actual statistics on this.
(Setting aside the case of weird Andorran co-principality in which one prince is elected in France and the other is appointed in Rome...)

There are ten extant monarchies in Europe (Belgium, Denmark, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, UK). Eight of the ten monarchs are descended from George I.

The Prince of Monaco is not descended from George I.

The other exception is the Hans-Adam II, Prince of Liechtenstein. However, his son married Sophie of Bavaria. Their son, Prince Joseph Wenzel is descended from George I, via his mother. It is expected that he will be Liechtenstein's monarch in the fullness of time.

Here's the fun part! Prince Joseph Wenzel is also in line to be the Jacobite pretender, also via his mother! I tracked that back: if I'm right, Joseph Wenzel's great great great grandmother Maria Theresa of Austria Este was the first Jacobite pretender to be descended from George I, and hence to notionally be part of the full line of succession to the throne of the United Kingdom.

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #869  
Old 08-25-2012, 09:37 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daz_Voz View Post
Here's the fun part! Prince Joseph Wenzel is also in line to be the Jacobite pretender, also via his mother! I tracked that back: if I'm right, Joseph Wenzel's great great great grandmother Maria Theresa of Austria Este was the first Jacobite pretender to be descended from George I, and hence to notionally be part of the full line of succession to the throne of the United Kingdom.
As an Archduchess of Austria-Este she was bound to be a Catholic, so not in line.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #870  
Old 08-25-2012, 09:46 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 318
I wish they'd go ahead and remove the Catholic ban. No reason why the monarch can't be Catholic and appoint a Viceroy for the CofE.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #871  
Old 08-25-2012, 10:03 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
There is no intention to remove the requirement that the monarch be a member of the Church of England. The intention is only to allow those in the line of succession to marry Roman Catholics without losing their place in the line of succession.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #872  
Old 08-25-2012, 10:14 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Singapore, Singapore
Posts: 73
Quote:
As an Archduchess of Austria-Este she was bound to be a Catholic, so not in line.
Good catch.

Quote:
There is no intention to remove the requirement that the monarch be a member of the Church of England.
The Prince of Wales has occasionally made noises in that direction.

But yes it's not going to happen any time soon.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #873  
Old 08-25-2012, 12:20 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daz_Voz View Post
Here's the fun part! Prince Joseph Wenzel is also in line to be the Jacobite pretender, also via his mother! I tracked that back: if I'm right, Joseph Wenzel's great great great grandmother Maria Theresa of Austria Este was the first Jacobite pretender to be descended from George I, and hence to notionally be part of the full line of succession to the throne of the United Kingdom.
Another fun, and much lesser known, fact - Joseph Wenzel will one day inherit claims to Armenian Throne (Cilician Armenia) as well though his mother.
Contrary to popular belief, the claims to the Throne of Armenian Cilicia do NOT rest with the House of Savoy but are now with the Bavarian House.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daz_Voz View Post
The Prince of Wales has occasionally made noises in that direction.
But yes it's not going to happen any time soon.
I think Prince Charles has expressed the wish to be "protector" of all Faiths in Britain - not just Anglican. However, I don't believe he has actually voiced an opinion that the Monarch should not belong to the Anglican Church.
Reply With Quote
  #874  
Old 10-24-2012, 02:50 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Coronation Oath

I'm not sure HM has done all she can to uphold her Oath and many people I talk with think she has in fact broken it.
You can read the Oath here Coronation Oath, 2nd June 1953

The specific parts that concern me and other monarchists are where the Queen swears to govern the people of her realms "according to their respective laws and customs" - Signing the Treaty of Lisbon has given away the sovereignty of the United Kingdom to the Europeans

The other part is regarding the Protestant Reformed Religion. The Queen is the Supreme Governor of The Church of England, and she swears to the utmost of her power to maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel. HM swears to the utmost of her power to maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law. She swears to maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England.

Over consecutive governments during her reign and General Synods of the CoE, drastic changes have been made to the Anglican Faith and secular laws that undermine the Oath HM took to defend the Faith.
In fact in 2012 she is still styled as 'Defender of the Faith'

As an Anglican, it is a difficult pill for me to swallow and I fear much worse under Charles.
In fact this was the very reason the Queen's family was brought to the UK many years ago, and the Act of Settlement is a manifestation of this fact

The Queen is not a politician and to take such a solemn Oath before the Archbishop of Canterbury carries a huge burden and IMO, I don't think the Queen has done all she can to honour her Oath.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #875  
Old 10-24-2012, 02:58 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,105
I think she has done everything within her 'Queenly' powers that she can do to uphold her oath. We know what would have happened if she hadn't signed the Treaty of Lisbon, and exactly what could The Queen physically have done to stop her government and the church changing the faith over the years?

I don't believe it's the Queen's business to meddle, she'd just be put in the firing line for it.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #876  
Old 10-24-2012, 03:00 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Then why swear an oath if your're not going to put yourself in the firing line to honour it
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #877  
Old 10-24-2012, 04:34 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,427
We don't know how much she tried to stop any of the changes and was simply unsuccessful but I agree she hasn't kept her Coronation Oath at all.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #878  
Old 10-24-2012, 04:43 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
“Where is the power on earth to absolve me from the observance of every sentence of that Oath, particularly the one requiring me to maintain the Protestant Reformed Religion? Was not my family seated on the Throne for that express purpose, and shall I be the first to suffer it to be undermined, perhaps overturned? No, No, I had rather beg my bread from door to door throughout Europe, than consent to any such measure. I can give up my crown and retire from power. I can quit my palace and live in a cottage. I can lay my head on a block and lose my life, but I cannot break my Oath. If I violate that Oath, I am no longer legal Sovereign in this country”
--- His Late Majesty King George III to Parliament

It is a quote that makes many of us monarchists wonder about the present situation regarding the Act of Settlement and the Coronation Oath.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #879  
Old 10-24-2012, 05:18 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
The Queen reigns but she does not rule, that is the job of Parliament and the government of the day. Her reserve powers only kick in if a government acts unconstitutionally. There is no way she can stop a democratically elected government from entering into a treaty agreement, to do so would violate her role as constitutional monarch. She has reigned according to the laws of the UK.
She remains Supreme Governor of the Church of England but I am not sure what you expect of her in that role. The general public, at least those that are officially C of E have been attending the church in ever decreasing numbers to the point where church has become for many people only something to be called on for weddings, christenings and funerals and sometimes not even that. Islam is the fastest growing faith in this culturally diverse nation. Still the C of E remains the official state religion in England, but not in Scotland or Northern Ireland, so in that sense I would think she has kept her oath. Many today would not be upset of the C of E were to be disestablished.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #880  
Old 10-24-2012, 05:23 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Many today would not be upset of the C of E were to be disestablished.
Not any monarchist I know. That is the reason we have a Queen. Not for ribbon cuttings or Olympic galas but to honour her Oath. Disestablishment of the Church would be the end of the monarchy in Britain
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
act of settlement, catholicism, line of succession, succession


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jordan kate middleton king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman picture of the month pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]