Christening of Prince Louis of Cambridge: July 9, 2018


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Very sad to hear the that Queen and the Duke won't be present today!
 
Is there a difference between The Lady Laura Meade and Lady Laura Meade ? Or is the word The just the most official form of address? Meaning that it was The Lady Diana Spencer as well?
 
Is there a difference between The Lady Laura Meade and Lady Laura Meade ? Or is the word The just the most official form of address? Meaning that it was The Lady Diana Spencer as well?

Yes, Diana was The Lady Diana Spencer (that's what was on the wedding invitations).

I *think* there are some women styled "lady" who aren't entitled to the "the," like ladies of the Garter and Thistle.
 
I'm shocked that the Queen and DoE are not attending. Didn't they attend the Christenings for their other 5 great-grandchildren?

I picked Harry Aubrey-Fletcher as a godfather so i'm pleased to see him chosen. I picked Lucy Middleton for Charlotte so I was one child off for her.

I'm quite surprised William chose Guy Pelly and Nicolas van Cutsem. While both are close friends, they are both controversial men. I guess since it's the third child and the Queen isn't attending, William thought he could be a little looser with his choices.
God parents are for life, not just for the Christening! I am sure the choice of God parents had nothing to do with who may or may not attend the christening.
 
Is there a difference between The Lady Laura Meade and Lady Laura Meade ? Or is the word The just the most official form of address? Meaning that it was The Lady Diana Spencer as well?

Maybe The because her father is the current Earl? If he was deceased maybe she'd lose 'The'. I don't know, just a guess.
 
Hmm, the Queen not attending (and Philip) is very interesting. I don't generally trust BP when they say it isn't for health reasons...

Then again, maybe the Queen is simply exhausted. She had a busy week of engagements last week and another this week and may just want to take it easier. Philip's lack of attendance I wonder if that has more to do with it being in London versus Windsor?

Pretty surprised Guy Pelly made the cut for godparent lol. But then again, he has shown himself to be a loyal friend even if he has made some interesting choices.
 
Wikipedia says:

Daughters of Dukes, Marquesses and Earls are The Lady on envelope and Lady in oral.
The same counts for the wives of Dukes and of Marquesses.

So it was always Lady Diana because it was in oral form.
 
Last edited:
Whenever the Queen misses an important event, there is speculation about her health. The fact that the Palace made a point to deny that her absence was due to health concerns actually has the opposite effect of increasing the speculation.

I agree. :cool: I don't think the PR folks are totally honest about health issues. There might be complicated, layered reasons, one being a judicious sense of how often does one ascribe an absence to 'feeling poorly'. Better to just say there will be an absence and move on.
 
Last edited:
Hmm, the Queen not attending (and Philip) is very interesting. I don't generally trust BP when they say it isn't for health reasons...

Then again, maybe the Queen is simply exhausted. She had a busy week of engagements last week and another this week and may just want to take it easier. Philip's lack of attendance I wonder if that has more to do with it being in London versus Windsor?

Pretty surprised Guy Pelly made the cut for godparent lol. But then again, he has shown himself to be a loyal friend even if he has made some interesting choices.

Loyalty and good friendships means a lot to the royals.
 
I felt pretty sure Lady Laura Meade would be one of the godparents when I saw her with Kate and the children at that polo match. They seemed very friendly.

I am a bit surprised they didn't choose a royal cousin, though.
 
I'm shocked that the Queen and DoE are not attending. Didn't they attend the Christenings for their other 5 great-grandchildren?
I did not expect this, I wonder about the reason behind it. The christening of a great grandchild is really special, why miss it if not for health reasons?
Whenever the Queen misses an important event, there is speculation about her health. The fact that the Palace made a point to deny that her absence was due to health concerns actually has the opposite effect of increasing the speculation.
Hmm, the Queen not attending (and Philip) is very interesting. I don't generally trust BP when they say it isn't for health reasons...

Then again, maybe the Queen is simply exhausted. She had a busy week of engagements last week and another this week and may just want to take it easier. Philip's lack of attendance I wonder if that has more to do with it being in London versus Windsor?
I agree. :cool: I don't think the PR folks are totally honest about health issues. There might be complicated, layered reasons, one being a judicious sense of how often does one ascribe an absence to 'feeling poorly'. Better to just say there will be an absence and move on.
Well, perhaps we should just calm down a bit.

1. According to all reliable sources during the past few years, the Queen is in ''remarkable'' god health for her age (yes that's the word they have been using), and if you take a look at her when she is out and about, you'll se it.

2. She has been spending her weekend with Philip in Norfolk, following her busy schedule in Scotland last week, and is on her way back to London today for yet a busy schedule this week.

Tweets from Rebecca English:

Rebecca English @RE_DailyMail
The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh will not be attending today's christening. There's no health issue for the Queen. She was working flat out in Scotland last week and has got a busy few days in London with the RAF Centenary event tomorrow and #Trump on Friday.

Rebecca English @RE_DailyMail
The Queen & Philip have just spent the weekend together in Norfolk. He is remaining there while she travels back to London today. Her decision not to attend was mutually agreed with William & Kate, while Philip clearly doesn't want to attend public events unless he really has to.
 
Last edited:
People are hardly being hysterical, just discussing behavior seemingly out of the normal for the Queen.

And just because BP says there is no health doesn’t mean anything, for the record. The Queen is spry for 92 but 92 is still 92.

As it is, I myself lean more toward her being tired and taking some extra time to rest. I am sure William doesn’t begrudge his grandmother that and she will see plenty of Louis over the next few months.

I think I am also still getting used to Philip’s total retirement from public life. I thought these family occasions like christenings he would attend. I wonder if there was a discussion about holding the christening in Norfolk again to make it a little easier for Philip? He probably didn’t want the fuss.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am very surprised, somewhat shocked even, that the Queen and DoE are not attending the Christening....I can't imagine any reason for them not to. Ill health has been denied, they aren't out of the country etc. This is just very strange to me.


LaRae
 
Of course William and Catherine understand The Queen and Prince Philip not being able to attend, but the media and folks online still aren’t used to the fact that The Queen and Prince Philip are old. Prince Philip is retired and Her Majesty is being careful with her activities.

Don’t know if anyone paid attention to The Queen after the Royal Garden Party in Scotland. The woman looked drained by the end of it. Look at the video.
 
I'm going to factor in the the heat wave that seems to have been hitting the UK lately. Places like the chapel at St. James are most likely not air conditioned. A large city such as London tends to hold in the heat more so that open land so with a high expected of 83F today, that is probably taken into consideration. As we grow older (and I can attest to this fact), the heat is far more bothersome and uncomfortable. When the normal temps for July is in the mid 70sF, climbing into the 80s is *hot*.
 
I am very surprised, somewhat shocked even, that the Queen and DoE are not attending the Christening....I can't imagine any reason for them not to. Ill health has been denied, they aren't out of the country etc. This is just very strange to me.


LaRae

But they didn't attend Isla's christening back in 2012 either, did they? And in that case, I see nothing weird in them not attending William and Catherine's third child's christening when they didn't attend Peter and Autumn's second child's christening :ermm:
 
The Queen is 92 and has a busy week. This week is also a massive one with the prep for Trump's arrival on Friday as well as the RAF celebrations tomorrow. It would have been nice for her attendance today but clearly everyone understands. But I also get why it is a surprise for many and it rightfully threw many off.
 
The Queen is 92 and has a busy week. This week is also a massive one with the prep for Trump's arrival on Friday as well as the RAF celebrations tomorrow. It would have been nice for her attendance today but clearly everyone understands. But I also get why it is a surprise for many and it rightfully threw many off.

I agree. As unfortunate as it is, it is understandable why the Queen and Phillip might have opted out. I am sure William and Catherine understand their reasoning and bear no ill or hurt feelings.

Although, I reckon it might have been wise to announce it prior to today (as it is stated that the decision has been made some time ago).
 
But they didn't attend Isla's christening back in 2012 either, did they? And in that case, I see nothing weird in them not attending William and Catherine's third child's christening when they didn't attend Peter and Autumn's second child's christening :ermm:


Different situation. Peter and Autumn live as private people. William is the heir of the heir. Louis's brother will be a King.



LaRae
 


So according to the announcement, guests will be served slices of christening cake which is from one of the tiers of the Cambridge wedding cake. Thank goodness there was still enough left from George and Charlotte's christenings!
 
Agreed that it might have been prudent to release that information prior to today to avoid the intense speculation that is currently making the rounds. I'm seeing quite a bit of speculation regarding the nature of their absence, the groundwork being laid for transition, etc.

Looking forward to seeing the video and pictures from today...fingers crossed for some sweet interaction between Uncle Harry and the children.
 
I am very surprised, somewhat shocked even, that the Queen and DoE are not attending the Christening....I can't imagine any reason for them not to. Ill health has been denied, they aren't out of the country etc. This is just very strange to me.
LaRae


Yes. I love the Queen, but when it comes to attending events by herself or family members abroad and, nowadays even at home, the BRF is, let´s say, "unique" among all other european royal courts, if not even eccentric... :whistling::whistling::whistling:
 
Different situation. Peter and Autumn live as private people. William is the heir of the heir. Louis's brother will be a King.



LaRae

So it's alright for HM to miss Isla's christening because she's... less important than Louis? ? I'm pretty sure Peter and Autumn don't think their daughter is less important just because she isn't gonna be the sister of a King.

But I'm also fairly certain that neither Peter and Autumn nor William and Catherine care a lot. The BRF has never seemed to me to care as much about the christenings as other royal families – as exemplified by the guest lists for all three Cambridge children's christenings. Only close family and godparents, nothing big or fancy. And I'm sure they understand if HM prioritise work.
 
So it's alright for HM to miss Isla's christening because she's... less important than Louis? ? I'm pretty sure Peter and Autumn don't think their daughter is less important just because she isn't gonna be the sister of a King.

But I'm also fairly certain that neither Peter and Autumn nor William and Catherine care a lot. The BRF has never seemed to me to care as much about the christenings as other royal families – as exemplified by the guest lists for all three Cambridge children's christenings. Only close family and godparents, nothing big or fancy. And I'm sure they understand if HM prioritise work.


Has nothing to do with importance or that Peter is less than William.

As I said...Peter and his family are private citizens. William and his family are not. Yes it is surprising that the Queen is not there for the Christening for a child of a future King.


LaRae
 
Different situation. Peter and Autumn live as private people. William is the heir of the heir. Louis's brother will be a King.

LaRae


Are we talking about succession or an important family event? I cannot think of any other reason for great-grandparents NOT to attend their gr grgandchild´ s christening other than a poor health!

Even more so when the great grandmother bears the title "defender of the faith" and is the worldly head of a church! To all christians claiming to be devout, a christening IS a very important occasion, no matter if you make a state affair of it (Sweden) or if it is a more private thing (Spain, Britain, Belgium).
 
Last edited:
So it's alright for HM to miss Isla's christening because she's... less important than Louis? ? I'm pretty sure Peter and Autumn don't think their daughter is less important just because she isn't gonna be the sister of a King.

But I'm also fairly certain that neither Peter and Autumn nor William and Catherine care a lot. The BRF has never seemed to me to care as much about the christenings as other royal families – as exemplified by the guest lists for all three Cambridge children's christenings. Only close family and godparents, nothing big or fancy. And I'm sure they understand if HM prioritise work.

I am sure the BRF cares for the christening very much (especially HM who has always been portrayed as a very devout christian). But some royal families consider christenings a private event rather than a State occasion with dignitaries, politicians and other personalities invited, the way Scandivian royals do.
 
Doesn’t the BRF have private christenings for all their members?
 
Has nothing to do with importance or that Peter is less than William.

As I said...Peter and his family are private citizens. William and his family are not. Yes it is surprising that the Queen is not there for the Christening for a child of a future King.


LaRae

Correct, William and his family are not private citizens but the christening is private. So sure, it may be surprising that she isn't gonna be there if you'd anticipated she'd be there but it's not weird – just shows that she doesn't rank her great-grandchildren's importance according to their place in the line of succession.

I am sure the BRF cares for the christening very much (especially HM who has always been portrayed as a very devout christian). But some royal families consider christenings a private event rather than a State occasion with dignitaries, politicians and other personalities invited, the way Scandivian royals do.

And that's my point. The BRF's christenings are private events, there's not a lot of fuss about them and as such, they're clearly not necessarily events HM feels like she's obliged to prioritise over work. I legitimately can't see why people are making such a big deal out of it when she did the exact same thing six years ago.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doesn’t the BRF have private christenings for all their members?

More or less so. The christenings themselves are never filmed or televised, there are only official photographs released a few days later (never from the christening act itself).
 
Back
Top Bottom