Meghan Markle: Citizenship and Religious Conversion

[American Observer7]

In the UK, after marriage, yes. That will be what she uses. She can even be called that all around the world--but not on her US passport and US legal documents.

It has nothing to do whatsoever with her US passport or her legal documents. She will still have that passport and documents after she's married and the title of HRH.

 

[Mbruno]

It has nothing to do whatsoever with her US passport or her legal documents. She will still have that passport and documents after she's married and the title of HRH.

O-H-Anglophile was making a point that her HRH style won't be officially recognized in the US and, therefore, cannot be included in a US passport or any other US documents.

Titles on the other hand, including peerages, are routinely used in British passports.

 

[American Observer7]

O-H-Anglophile was making a point that her HRH style won't be officially recognized in the US and, therefore, cannot be included in a US passport or any other US documents.

Titles on the other hand, including peerages, are routinely used in British passports.

Oh! I understand now.... True. Thank you.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Does the Anglican Church of England stipulate that Meghan must have a confirmation sponsor when she is confirmed?

 

[MARG]

Well since she is being both baptised and confirmed I suspect she will not be on her own. Perhaps they will do it in chapel with her soon too be family during a Sunday service.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Does the Anglican Church of England stipulate that Meghan must have a confirmation sponsor when she is confirmed?

What is a 'confirmation sponsor'?

I have never heard of such a thing. I was confirmed in the Church of England in 1972 and have been a regular attendee at CoE services ever since. I teach at a CoE school and we regularly have a number of students confirmed (about 5 - 6 every two to three years these days - was 50 or so in 1991 but now down to 5 - 6 every couple of years as fewer and fewer young people want to follow Christian teachings where I live).

 

[Osipi]

Perhaps its being confused with the Roman Catholic confirmation. When I was confirmed, we not only selected someone to be a sort of spiritual mentor as a sponsor (usually an aunt or uncle) but we also chose confirmation names usually a saint we'd like to emulate.

This, for me, was back in the 60s so things very well could have drastically changed by now.

 

[Denville]

Perhaps its being confused with the Roman Catholic confirmation. When I was confirmed, we not only selected someone to be a sort of spiritual mentor as a sponsor (usually and aunt or uncle) but we also chose confirmation names usually a saint we'd like to emulate.

This, for me, was back in the 60s so things very well could have drastically changed by now.

I was confirmed in the 70s as RC and I don't remember anyne being a sponsor. its normal to take another name at confirmation, to add to one's baptismal names but I've never heard of a sponsor. That is at Baptism.. a sponsor or godparent is there to make promises on behalf of the child and to be (ideally) a mentor...

 

[Osipi]

Maybe its different in the parish I was in and it was also in the US. I remember asking my Aunt Irene to be my sponsor and she stood with me as I got slapped in the face by the presiding Cardinal.

We're getting off track on how all this pertains to Meghan. I imagine that when she is confirmed, it will be a small and private thing and not something that is announced to the public.

 

[Denville]

MWe're getting off track on how all this pertains to Meghan. I imagine that when she is confirmed, it will be a small and private thing and not something that is announced to the public.

well its not likely to be a BIG public thing but I see no reason why it should not be announced. they have made it public that she's receiving instruction in the Anglican faith and that she's going to be received intot it.. so it is harldy a private matter.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I was confirmed (RC) and my aunt was my sponsor. I was my niece's sponsor a little over 10 years ago. I don't know how it is in Anglican UK churches, so I don't know if Meghan will need a sponsor-if she does there are many to choose from. It may just be in the Catholic Church.

I know Kate was confirmed before she and William married, but I don't think they announced when it occurred. I don't see why Meghan's would be announced. We were told it would happen, I see no reason to doubt that.

 

[dgtns]

What is a 'confirmation sponsor'?

I have never heard of such a thing. I was confirmed in the Church of England in 1972 and have been a regular attendee at CoE services ever since. I teach at a CoE school and we regularly have a number of students confirmed (about 5 - 6 every two to three years these days - was 50 or so in 1991 but now down to 5 - 6 every couple of years as fewer and fewer young people want to follow Christian teachings where I live).

A Confirmation Sponsor is an adult member of the Roman Catholic Church who stands behind.....i.e. "sponsors" the candidate for confirmation. They "vouch" that the candidate is ready to accept the responsibilities of an adult Catholic.

 

[Denville]

I wI know Kate was confirmed before she and William married, but I don't think they announced when it occurred. I don't see why Meghan's would be announced. We were told it would happen, I see no reason to doubt that.

I believe that it was announced about kate, either that she was preparing for confirmation or that she'd been confirmed. Why shouldn't it? Its nothing that has to be kept secret.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

It will take at least 5 years for Meghan to obtain UK citizenship. Her parents are American! I am sure they would object to her giving up her US citizenship, a place where she was born and raised! It is not right to expect that of her! Meghan says she's proud of who she is and where she comes from, well, the US is a part of that.

What's next? Her Mom and Daddy will now move to the UK, and stop celebrating American holidays etc. Part of what makes Meghan unique is that she is American Born.

Emily Andrews posted on Twitter, "Meghan will become dual citizen of the US and the UK."

And that is the way it should be.

As a dual citizen, all Megan will have to do is enter the U.S. on her American Passport and enter UK with her British Passport. I was a dual citizen and that's what I had to do.

 

[Somebody]

I agree. Upon marriage, the wife takes on the feminine form of the titles and styles of her husband. It has nothing to do with citizenship but with marriage.

Are you sure? I'd say there is a difference in what you use vs what you take/are. If for example a Dutch woman marries a British man, according to Dutch laws she would not change her surname if British law would prevail, she would change her surname, so, given that her nationality is Dutch, I would assume she will officially keep her family name while she might use her husband's surname in social life, if she would file for anything official it would be her maiden name she has to use.

So, applying this to Meghan, given that Meghan is not a British citizen she might be called HRH the duchess of X but legally she remains Rachel Meghan Markle (until she becomes a British citizen?).

 

[jacqui24]

Are you sure? I'd say there is a difference in what you use vs what you take/are. If for example a Dutch woman marries a British man, according to Dutch laws she would not change her surname if British law would prevail, she would change her surname, so, given that her nationality is Dutch, I would assume she will officially keep her family name while she might use her husband's surname in social life, if she would file for anything official it would be her maiden name she has to use.

So, applying this to Meghan, given that Meghan is not a British citizen she might be called HRH the duchess of X but legally she remains Rachel Meghan Markle (until she becomes a British citizen?).

Harry isn't the Duke of Whatever under US law either, but he is addressed as such in social setting even in US. Her paperwork in Britain would reflect as British law recognizes titles.

 

[Somebody]

Harry isn't the Duke of Whatever under US law either, but he is addressed as such in social setting even in US. Her paperwork in Britain would reflect as British law recognizes titles.

No, but you are comparing apples and oranges: he is British (so his name and title depend on British law) and Meghan is not (she is American, so her name and title depend on American law). Harry doesn't have US paperwork; and Meghan doesn't have UK paperwork, so I still don't understand how she can BE the duchess; as British law is irrelevant for her as a non-British citizen. While Harry clearly can BE the duke of X (as he currently IS HRH prince Henry of Wales) if his grandmother makes him one.

What British paperwork would she have as a non-British citizen? The only thing I can think of is when her name is to be put on a marriage certificate (she better makes sure that it reflects her American papers) and a birth certificate (however, if she legally still is Rachel Meghan Markle it shouldn't read 'HRH Rachel Meghan Duchess of X'; as the only way she can be so is if she is married to the duke of X and if she is a British citizen; because she cannot change her name according to British law as long as she (only) is an American citizen). Or am I missing something?

Of course both can be called anything in social settings (either in the US or in the UK or elsewhere), I only question whether Meghan can formally BE a duchess as long as she isn't a British citizen.

 

[moby]

Consular officers would say, nope, she retains the name she has in her birth certificate in whatever situation until she marries in foreign country X that requires or allows her to change her last name/titles to that of her husband's. After marriage, she may use her husband's surname or titles and her marriage certificate, executed in X country, will be basis of that name change. This is regardless of her changing nationalities.

 

[Iluvbertie]

A Confirmation Sponsor is an adult member of the Roman Catholic Church who stands behind.....i.e. "sponsors" the candidate for confirmation. They "vouch" that the candidate is ready to accept the responsibilities of an adult Catholic.

The CoE does not have such a person. They ask the confirmees directly if they are prepared to make that step and follow on from there. No need for anyone else to make that comment as they are being asked to confirm the vows made for them at baptism and they need to be old enough to understand that concept and be able to make that commitment for themselves.

 

[Mbruno]

The CoE does not have such a person. They ask the confirmees directly if they are prepared to make that step and follow on from there. No need for anyone else to make that comment as they are being asked to confirm the vows made for them at baptism and they need to be old enough to understand that concept and be able to make that commitment for themselves.

In the Catholic liturgy, the confirmee is also directly asked to confirm the baptism vows that were made for him/her as an infant. The role of the sponsor is actually to present the candidate to the bishop and to give the bishop the candidate's name before the anoiting with the Chrism. The sponsor doesn't really make any vow on behalf of the candidate, but he or she is supposed to be someone who will help the candidate to keep his/her vows after the confirmation and will continuously assist him/her in his/her spiritual life.

At least, that is what I remember from my confirmation, but I was 15 at the time and I confess that I don't remember all the details of the liturgy.

 

[Grandma828]

Catholic rules have changed. At. one time children were confirmed at age 9. Now it is about 10th or 11th grade. Of my 4 sons, 2 have confirmation sponsors, 2 do not..It can vary from one area to another.

 

[Mbruno]

Harry isn't the Duke of Whatever under US law either, but he is addressed as such in social setting even in US. Her paperwork in Britain would reflect as British law recognizes titles.

As a foreign national who is not a permanent resident of the United States, Harry is unlikely to have any US document. If at any point he is required to apply for a visa or electronic travel authorization to enter the US, he will be required to write down his name exactly as it appears in his British passport, which most likely also includes his royal title and style.

 

[Ish]

Harry isn't the Duke of Whatever under US law either, but he is addressed as such in social setting even in US. Her paperwork in Britain would reflect as British law recognizes titles.

There is a difference between social settings and legal settings.

Harry legally would be recognized as Mr Henry Mountbatten-Windsor were he to be required to fill out legal paperwork in the US (as William was recognized similarly when he entered into a lawsuit in France). However, socially if he is in the US he is recognized as Prince Henry of Wales.

Meghan will legally remain Rachel Meghan Markle in the US after her marriage, even if she is socially recognized as Princess Henry of Wales, or the feminine version of whatever title Harry is given. Thus, her passport to enter the US will say Rachel Meghan Markle, but her place card at a White House state dinner would name her as HRH The Duchess of Wherever.

Where Meghan’s legal name gets particularly tricky is going to be on British legal forms (ie her driver’s license or the birth registry for future children) - do they go with Rachel Meghan Markle (like her US forms), Rachel Meghan, HRH The Duchess of Wherever (like Kate on her children’s birth registries), or some combination of the two? And will that change after she becomes a British citizen?

What will also be interesting to see is if she changes her legal name in the US to reflect her marriage - becoming Rachel Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor - or if she stays Rachel Meghan Markle.

 

[Mbruno]

Harry legally would be recognized as Mr Henry Mountbatten-Windsor were he to be required to fill out legal paperwork in the US (as William was recognized similarly when he entered into a lawsuit in France).

Not necessarily. As I said, if Harry is ever required to fill out any US immigration paperwork, like an application for a visa or ETA for example, he will have to write down his name as it appears in his British passport. Most likely, there is no British passport issued in the name of a Mr Henry Mountbatten-Windsor and, even if there were, it would be another person and Harry could not apply for any travel documents under that name.

As for Rachel, I don't see a reason why she would go through the trouble of changing her last name in her US documents. Many women don't do it anyway these days after they get married.

 

[Ish]

Not necessarily. As I said, if Harry is ever required to fill out any US immigration paperwork, like an application for a visa or ETA for example, he will have to write down his name as it appears in his British passport. Most likely, there is no British passport issued in the name of a Mr Henry Mountbatten-Windsor.

As for Rachel, I don't see a reason why she would go through the trouble of changing her last name in her US documents. Many women don't do it anyway these days after they get married.

Sorry, I missed the bit were we were talking about the theoretical immigration of Prince Harry - I thought we were talking more general things like lawsuits and the such, that would have him still remaining a British resident. You’re right, if he were to immigrate to the US, his immigration paperwork would care about his name on his British passport, which in all likelihood is Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales (right now).

I’m 50/50 on whether or not I think Meghan will change her legal name in the US; on the one hand it’s a hassle and not really necessary, especially as she won’t be using her legal name for the most part. On the other hand, I believe name changes are public record, and there might be backlash if the press report that she hasn’t changed her name. And let’s be honest - there is no way the DM wouldn’t look into that.

 

[AdmirerUS]

...
What will also be interesting to see is if she changes her legal name in the US to reflect her marriage - becoming Rachel Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor - or if she stays Rachel Meghan Markle.

I brought the Rachel thing up months ago and people universally dismissed the thought - as she has been Meghan since childhood.

I'd guess that if she does a US name change, she also drops the Rachel. And if she has the choice in the UK, the Rachel may disappear there as well.

 

[Ish]

I don’t know that she would necessarily drop the name - she’s always gone by Meghan, sure, but that doesn’t mean she dislikes it or would want to change her given names. I have a grandmother who went by her middle name from birth, yet her first name was still very much a part of her identity, and would have never considered changing her name to re-order her names or drop her first name.

I expect we’ll see the name Rachel Meghan pop up in her vows and when the births of any children are registered, but not much outside of that. Socially she’ll continue to be Meghan, and will sign cards, guest books, etc, as Meghan - this has basically been indicated as the case by her being referred to as Ms Meghan Markle in the CC and by KP.

 

[Pranter]

I've only ever used my middle name my whole life. It's how my parents called me from day one...my first name is only used for legal documents and in business contexts.



LaRae

 

[Iluvbertie]

I don’t know that she would necessarily drop the name - she’s always gone by Meghan, sure, but that doesn’t mean she dislikes it or would want to change her given names. I have a grandmother who went by her middle name from birth, yet her first name was still very much a part of her identity, and would have never considered changing her name to re-order her names or drop her first name.

I expect we’ll see the name Rachel Meghan pop up in her vows and when the births of any children are registered, but not much outside of that. Socially she’ll continue to be Meghan, and will sign cards, guest books, etc, as Meghan - this has basically been indicated as the case by her being referred to as Ms Meghan Markle in the CC and by KP.

She has not yet appeared in the CC.

She has appeared once in the FE - for the radio station - but not for the other visits she has made with Harry.

She won't appear in the CC until she is officially a royal - on her wedding day. They have stopped putting her in the FE - no doubt on instructions from above - as she isn't yet royal.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I know Kate was confirmed before she and William married, but I don't think they announced when it occurred. I don't see why Meghan's would be announced. We were told it would happen, I see no reason to doubt that.

I believe that it was announced about kate, either that she was preparing for confirmation or that she'd been confirmed. Why shouldn't it? Its nothing that has to be kept secret.

That's exactly what I wrote--it was announced that Kate was going to be confirmed before the wedding but we didn't get an announcement that it had happened. It has been announced that Meghan will be confirmed before the wedding, I don't expect an announcement when it has occurs.