The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 09-30-2017, 11:57 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 3,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Okay, the bookies should be taking bets I suppose as to where the venue for H&M's wedding will be: St. George's Chapel, or Westminster Abbey with BP appearance after. I'm betting WA & a BP appearance.
Nope. I think they are going to do something totally unexpected. Meghan will have to be comfortable with whatever takes place. Harry is going to be devoted to her comfort level in that way, I do believe. Whatever chosen will be reflective of how they will be conducting their royal lives. If not Los Angeles I'm hoping for an Edward and Sophie type wedding.
__________________

__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:00 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 242
Not sure why such an emphasis on Meghan's religious beliefs. She will never be queen, so I am not sure it matters.

What is difference between a civil and religious wedding?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:06 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Norfolk, United States
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
Nope. I think they are going to do something totally unexpected. Meghan will have to be comfortable with whatever takes place. Harry is going to be devoted to her comfort level in that way, I do believe. Whatever chosen will be reflective of how they will be conducting their royal lives. If not Los Angeles I'm hoping for an Edward and Sophie type wedding.
Can I just ask if your posts are based on what you want to happen or what you think is likely? The reason I ask is because of course everything is possible, but the likelihood? That's a different story.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:07 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,673
A civil wedding is generally done by a judge or official/officiant. A religious wedding is conducted by a member of the clergy and depending on the denomination often in a Church itself. At least some Churches consider marriage to be a Sacrament.

If we are placing bets...I'm putting money on Westminster Abbey!

LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:10 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 242
Thank you for explaining the difference! I don't want a wedding like Edward and Sophie had. I feel that was a one off.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:20 AM
hel hel is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Posts: 398
It's important to note that in the UK, Canada, US, etc (i.e., the countries that don't follow the European two wedding model), a religious marriage is *also* in effect a civil marriage, in that the religious official is licensed by the state to perform legal marriages and is acting as both an agent of the church and an agent of the state.

Ultimately, marriage is regulated by the state; who is/isn't married and what benefits accrue to those who are married vs those who aren't are all determined by statute. A marriage in a church by someone who wasn't actually licensed would result in not being legally married. In contrast, a non-traditional/non-religious backyard wedding by someone who happens to be both clergy and licensed to perform marriages is a legal marriage.

Within the context of the modern legal system, the religious status of the officiant has no bearing on the legality of a marriage. This is the main reason that the question of Meghan's first marriage taking place on a beach is irrelevant. The CoE recognizes non-religious marriages because they get their ability to marry people from the state, and the state recognizes both religious and civil marriages. Since the state forbids bigamy, it's not legal for a minister to marry a previously civilly married person who hasn't gotten a divorce.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:20 AM
Somebody's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Peru
Posts: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
A civil wedding is generally done by a judge or official/officiant. A religious wedding is conducted by a member of the clergy and depending on the denomination often in a Church itself. At least some Churches consider marriage to be a Sacrament.

If we are placing bets...I'm putting money on Westminster Abbey!

LaRae
The Anglican Church is not one of them.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:32 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
Nope. I think they are going to do something totally unexpected. Meghan will have to be comfortable with whatever takes place. Harry is going to be devoted to her comfort level in that way, I do believe. Whatever chosen will be reflective of how they will be conducting their royal lives. If not Los Angeles I'm hoping for an Edward and Sophie type wedding.
They could definitely surprise us, as that's what they've been doing all along. However, whatever they do is going to follow royal protocol mostly.

Anyway, why do you think Meghan would not be 'comfortable' with Westminster Abbey? You think it's too grand and OTT formal? I believe Meghan will be comfortable in any situation with Harry, and I think they've already proven that. However, I can see them being different or unexpected, but still following royal protocol.

In any case, they will NOT be conducting their royal lives in L.A.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:32 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,673
Yes I'm aware of that Somebody.


LaRae
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:47 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 386
What exactly did Edward & Sophie have for their wedding that is thought apropos to Harry & Meghan? Edward is the third and youngest son of a reigning monarch. Also, he did not serve in the military.

Harry is the second son of a soon-to-be reigning monarch and he served in the military. He also has a significant high profile and greater public popularity and ease with people than Edward.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:53 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Washington D.C., United States
Posts: 65
What are the churches available for a royal wedding in London?
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:53 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,047
Edward is the son of the reigning monarch.

Harry is the grandson of the reigning monarch.

What position he may hold in the future isn't the point.

It is what the position is at the time of his wedding that matters.

What serving in the military has to do with things is irrelevant.

The BRF have changed over time and they will take account of public opinion at the time of the marriage. If it is riding high then he may get a wedding in London but if in the doldrums then it will be a smaller affair at say Windsor.

I suspect Windsor is being set up as the place of marriage for the younger siblings and other minor royals rather than the big affairs in London simply to reduce costs, especially security costs.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:55 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 242
For reasons that I won't get into, I think if Harry and Meghan have a smaller wedding, some unfortunate conclusions may be drawn and some of the public may also draw those conclusions and feel validated.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-01-2017, 12:56 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Washington D.C., United States
Posts: 65
Would there be any consideration given to people who might descend on London (near Windsor) to catch a glimpse?

Quote:
Originally Posted by scriptgirl View Post
For reasons that I won't get into, I think if Harry and Meghan have a smaller wedding, some unfortunate conclusions may be drawn and some of the public may also draw those conclusions and feel validated.
Hmmmm.... I still remember the to-do after Diana died and how long it took HMQ to bend to societal pressure and make a few changes.

And that was Diana.

I'm not sure - if royal protocol or sensibility demands a smaller venue - that HMQ would bend to avoid unfortunate conclusions. I agree with you that some people would delight in Meghan appearing to be slighted - but she wouldn't really be in reality.

But often it's the perception that matters.

The determining factor might be whether the perception of a blowout bells and whistles event at the Abbey in London as being too expensive would trump (heh) the perception of Meghan being slighted (due to heritage) by having the wedding in a smaller venue.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-01-2017, 01:03 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 242
I think in this case, perception would be everything and I would not risk unfortunate conclusions being born since Meghan would be the "first".

The Daily Fail and it's supporters would have a field day if a smaller wedding and venue were chosen and a less "important" wedding will always be talked about and whispered about. Not a good look or start for Meghan and Harry, who have unique set of circumstances re their wedding.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 10-01-2017, 01:08 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Edward is the son of the reigning monarch.

Harry is the grandson of the reigning monarch.

What position he may hold in the future isn't the point.

It is what the position is at the time of his wedding that matters.

What serving in the military has to do with things is irrelevant.

The BRF have changed over time and they will take account of public opinion at the time of the marriage. If it is riding high then he may get a wedding in London but if in the doldrums then it will be a smaller affair at say Windsor.

I suspect Windsor is being set up as the place of marriage for the younger siblings and other minor royals rather than the big affairs in London simply to reduce costs, especially security costs.
I was wondering what Edward and Sophie had that people think is apropos to Harry? Is it the fact that Edward and Sophie married at St. George's Chapel, Windsor, and that is thought to be where Harry would automatically get married too?

The reason I brought up Harry's military career is because he will be wearing a military uniform which makes the occasion more formal than just an intimate family wedding.

As far as taking public opinion into account, those planning the details and logistics of a wedding would have to be making such 'public opinion' decisions right about now, since it's obvious Meghan and Harry are getting married and they may already be engaged.

Frankly, I doubt 'public opinion' is going to be the main criteria determining wedding venue. And right now, particularly after the high profile success of the Invictus Games, I would say that Harry's popularity and goodwill toward him and Meghan is extremely high.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-01-2017, 01:10 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Norfolk, United States
Posts: 605
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Edward is the son of the reigning monarch.

Harry is the grandson of the reigning monarch.

What position he may hold in the future isn't the point.

It is what the position is at the time of his wedding that matters.

What serving in the military has to do with things is irrelevant.

The BRF have changed over time and they will take account of public opinion at the time of the marriage. If it is riding high then he may get a wedding in London but if in the doldrums then it will be a smaller affair at say Windsor.

I suspect Windsor is being set up as the place of marriage for the younger siblings and other minor royals rather than the big affairs in London simply to reduce costs, especially security costs.
I wouldn't be so sure about the last part, but you nailed it before then about public opinion. Edward and Sophie married in 1999 when the royal family is still recovering from the terrible blow of Diana's death. That's not the case today, especially not for Harry, who is most often likened to his mother with his ability to connect with the people. And that's why I think the Abbey has a good chance. Also, at the time of his wedding, Edward had a much lower royal profile than Harry does now in terms of royal duties. If I remember correctly, they weren't expected to be full time royals then. Harry's future and that of his wife, OTOH, is very clearly spelled out at this point.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 10-01-2017, 01:12 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by FashionMaven View Post
What are the churches available for a royal wedding in London?
Those in London used in the past 200 years include:

The Chapel Royal at St James - where Queen Victoria, the Empress Frederick, George V, the late Duke of Gloucester

Westminster Abbey - George VI, Elizabeth II, Princesses Mary, Margaret, Anne, Alexandra, the late Duke of Kent, the Duke of York among others.

St Paul's Cathedral - Charles

Other possibilities:

St Margaret's - next to Westminster Abbey - smaller and more intimate than the great abbey. This is where the late Earl Mountbatten was married in 1922.

There are other smaller churches e.g. St Martin's in the Field - not far from BP and the official parish church taking in BP. Queen Mary used to worship there on occasions.

He could choose a place not chosen before e.g. Southwark Cathedral.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 10-01-2017, 01:13 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,452
Public perception will be low on the list of where they actually decide to marry (presuming they even get engaged which there is a good indication that they will). The top factors I think will be:

1. What Harry and Meghan actually want.
2. What the powers that be that monitor the security level deem safe.
3. Easy access for Granny and Grandpa and family to attend

No matter what happens, no matter where the wedding is held and no matter who attends or doesn't attend, there will be detractors coming out of the woodwork because detracting is what they do best. To plan a wedding because of what people *might* say is just plain idiotic.

I'm placing my bet on St. Georges Chapel in Windsor and a carriage ride through the streets there. I just have a gut feeling and my gut tells me Windsor and also that I need something to drink here.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 10-01-2017, 01:15 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,047
When I mentioned security I wasn't talking so much about the detractors but real threats to the safety of the public and the event.

Given the terrorist threats in London this year alone it would make sense to not add to those situations if at all possible so Windsor makes more sense as control to the grounds it controlled and that has to be a consideration.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 8 (0 members and 8 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
Tiaras and Jewels for Prince Harry's future wife wymanda Royal Jewels General Discussion 865 11-22-2017 12:15 PM
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1896 11-14-2017 06:35 PM
Future Home for Prince Harry JOY! British Royal Residences 935 11-05-2017 03:12 AM




Popular Tags
baptism best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events david armstrong-jones denmark duchess of cambridge gala dress earl of snowdon fascism general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy nazi news pablo urdangarín picture of the week portugal prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess alexandra of luxembourg princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia gowns queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queenmother queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:10 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises