The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #4061  
Old 02-13-2017, 05:32 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Norfolk, United States
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
If he really wanted what's best for his sister, he would've just gone away. It always amazes me how same parent can have totally different children.
__________________

  #4062  
Old 02-13-2017, 05:40 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
The key word there was Elected head of State. Having foreign Royals, whether its Kings or Queen doesn't make it a State wedding. Andrew's had royals (reigning monarchs) at his wedding, that didn't make it a state occasion.

Anyway we are talking too much about a hypothetical wedding that might not even happen
William's wedding was attended by foreign ambassadors accredited in the UK, who are state representatives. What is the point of inviting official foreign state representatives if it is not a state event ? Furthermore, as someone else said, the wedding was attended by all Governor Generals of the Commonwealth realms and seven Commonwealth realm PMs, who are elected heads of government.

The important point is that kings, PMs, and ambassadors are unlikely to attend Harry's wedding as it won't be a state event
__________________

  #4063  
Old 02-13-2017, 05:44 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
They weren't denied. They never asked I believe. Even back when they married, the COE have allowed certain divorcees to remarry in the Church at the discretion of the clergy. However, their case was pretty extreme. Camilla and Charles had an affair, which his then wife attributed to the break down of their marriage. And it was highly publicized.
That is OT, but, anyway, we don't know if they didn't ask and, even if they didn't, they may not have asked because they knew (or were told) that it would have been embarassing for the church's hierarchy to agree to it.
  #4064  
Old 02-13-2017, 07:09 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
William's wedding was attended by foreign ambassadors accredited in the UK, who are state representatives. What is the point of inviting official foreign state representatives if it is not a state event ? Furthermore, as someone else said, the wedding was attended by all Governor Generals of the Commonwealth realms and seven Commonwealth realm PMs, who are elected heads of government.

The important point is that kings, PMs, and ambassadors are unlikely to attend Harry's wedding as it won't be a state event


William and Kate's wedding wasn't a state event. It was at best a semi-state occasion.

As per St. James' Palace: "The wedding will not be a formal state occasion since Prince William is neither the sovereign nor the heir to the throne."

I believe the main difference that we saw is that when Charles got married, many foreign heads of state were invited based on their country's relationship with Britain. In addition, Governor Generals and Prime Ministers of Commonwealth realms were also invited.

When William got married, some foreign heads of state were invited and some ambassadors were invited, along with many foreign royals and of course the GGs and PMs of the Commonwealth.
  #4065  
Old 02-13-2017, 07:59 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 2,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
Harry's wedding will be a big deal folks!

He is marrying an American and she's biracial. That alone is an attention grabber! It will be televised. And Harry is a senior and the most popular Royal even over his brother! The BRF will capitalize on that for good press and exposure.
The polls that matter are those who ask whether you are for or against the monarchy, and approval ratings.

The unserious favourite royal polls are meaningless, but let us go through them.

The Queen came first (over both the Queen Mother and Diana) in almost all of the few polls that were made in the 80/90s.

From 2002 to 2010, the Queen came first in almost all of the few polls that were made.

The Queen has (since 2011) shared the first place with William, Kate and Harry. And yes, Harry has been more popular than William in some polls for three years now, but that is not going to last forever. And a possible wedding for Harry has nothing to do with popularity.

And let's go through the YouGov most admired person in the UK poll:

2014 - The 30 most admired persons in the UK:
1: The Queen with 18,74%
9: William with 2,6%
19: Kate with 0,80%
Harry was not even included in the poll.

2015 - The 15 most admired Women in the UK:
1: The Queen with 17%
5: Kate with 5,2%

2015 - The 15 most admired Men in the UK:
5: William with 6,5%
8: Harry with 5,9%

2016 - The 30 most admired Women in the UK:
1: The Queen with 19,5%
7: Kate with 3,6%

2016 - The 30 most admired Men in the UK:
4: Harry with 6,4%
6: William with 5,6%

The Queen was also polled the most admirred woman in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Germany in the 2016 poll.

The Queen is the head of state of the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and 12 other Countries. She is also the head of the Commonwealth and in that capacity the figurehead of 2 billion people. She is the most popular, iconic, well-known and most famous head of state (many would say person) in the world.

And let's go through the Royal Weddings:

Princess Elizabeth 1947: To and from Westminster Abbey in closed carriages and appearance on the balcony.

Margaret 1960: To and from Westminster Abbey in closed carriages and appearance on the balcony. (That had not happened today)

Anne 1973: To and from Westminster Abbey in closed carriages and appearance on the balcony. (That had not happened today)

Charles 1981: To and from St Paul's Cathedral in open carriages and appearance on the balcony.

Andrew 1986: To and from Westminster Abbey in open carriages and appearance on the balcony. (That had not happened today)

Edward 1999: A big televised Royal Wedding at St George's Chapel with a carriage procession in Windsor.

William 2011: A scaled-down wedding in comparison with the Abbey weddings mentioned above.

To Westminster Abbey in cars and back to the palace in open carriages for William/Kate and the bridal party, and closed carriages for the Queen/Philip, Charles/Camilla and Kate's parents and appearance on the balcony.

And remember: William was as popular as Harry (if not even more) when he married, and there were still complaining from media and other people about the costs.

A possible wedding for Harry: I'll be very surprised if he gets a Abbey wedding with a carriage procession and a balcony apperance.

I think we'll see much of the same as we saw for Edward in 1999, A big Televised Royal Wedding at St George's Chapel with a carriage procession in Windsor.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
  #4066  
Old 02-13-2017, 09:17 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Washington DC, United States
Posts: 335


Well, your British so you would know more than I. But I still think many will want to see the wedding in big part because who the bride is. I mean, it's different, fresh and new. If she were a Brit, I would not be this interested if at all.
  #4067  
Old 02-13-2017, 09:17 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by miche View Post
What religion is Meghan? She might not want a church wedding or a CoE wedding?


I thought I read she is Jewish
  #4068  
Old 02-13-2017, 09:27 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Washington DC, United States
Posts: 335
Meghan's brother gave an interview to inside edition. He apologized to Meghan and the entire royal family. Meghan's father needs to shut him up.

He needs to shut up! I am so glad she doesn't talk to him.
  #4069  
Old 02-13-2017, 09:41 PM
miche's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
Well, your British so you would know more than I. But I still think many will want to see the wedding in big part because who the bride is. I mean, it's different, fresh and new. If she were a Brit, I would not be this interested if at all.
The don't take the American public feelings into account when it comes to matters that involve the BRF
  #4070  
Old 02-13-2017, 09:52 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
I thought I read she is Jewish

Hard to tell...I don't think she's confirmed (to media) what faith she adheres to.. I've seen on article that said she said she was Jewish..but not sure about anything direct from her.



LaRae
  #4071  
Old 02-13-2017, 09:55 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
Well, your British so you would know more than I. But I still think many will want to see the wedding in big part because who the bride is. I mean, it's different, fresh and new. If she were a Brit, I would not be this interested if at all.
The American interest is understandable if there is going to be a wedding. But majority of people on this forum are interested in Monarchy

When we raise potential issues, we are not being anti-Megan, we are drawing on previous events and knowledge of the BRF

IF there is a wedding, it will be televised IMO but it is more likely that the wedding will take place at Windsor Castle (St Georges) than Westminster Abbey. And when I say that its because of how the BRF are now (rather than in the 1980s) and also that Harry is not one for large scale, formal events.

It wont be ignored but Harry is not in the direct line (and I think he's happy about that) and therefore it will be different.

But who knows? - none of us!
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
  #4072  
Old 02-13-2017, 10:17 PM
royaldreams's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 29
I agree with this, Harry's wedding will be a big deal. Also, keep in mind that his wedding will be the last one to be worthy of being televised (or at least garner great attention) until Prince George or Princess Charlotte get married, and that's a good 25+ years away.

So, the monarchy and the British media will milk Harry's wedding for all it's worth. Trust.


Quote:
Originally Posted by American Observer7 View Post
Harry's wedding will be a big deal folks!

He is marrying an American and she's biracial. That alone is an attention grabber! It will be televised. And Harry is a senior and the most popular Royal even over his brother! The BRF will capitalize on that for good press and exposure.
  #4073  
Old 02-13-2017, 10:59 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
I didn't mention Harry... but I will.

David Beckham was the only footballer and he was invited because of his work with William on England's World Cup bid.

As for the 'celebrities', again most have charity connections or are friends of Prince Charles.

Harry's guest list won't have the same foreign royals, politicians, members of the armed forces or clergy.

His friends are pretty much the same friends as William's, so they will be the same.
Of course not. It doesn't matter who Harry married, there isn't going to be the list if dignitaries that were at williams. Just like Andrew, Edward and annevdudnt gave the same as Charles. Had nothing to do with the bride. Or even the group. These are not personal invited. These are representatives.

What were talking here are personal invites. Those people who are actually there for the couple. There will be some foreign royals like the Greeks, German cousins, likely the Bavarian Harry hunts with.

It's not gaudy to have celebrities at williams because they were connected to his charities? Oh so it's only gaudy when it is the non royal who invited them. Lovely double standards. Okay for William to invite a celebrity he may meet once or twice at a charity dinner, but cringeworthy for Meghan to have coworkers.

Harry served in the military. And he is involved with many patronages. I would expect many of his old military bosses, like William, to attend. He has many patrinages as well. He works with celebrities all the time. So if Bryan Adams, Dominic west, and any other celebrities from walking or the Invictus games attend, is that gauche?

There could be some government. Meghan knows Justin Trudeau and his wife. As well as the mulroneys. Harry is friendly with the Obamas. For foreign royals how about prince Seeso who Harry works with on senteble?
  #4074  
Old 02-13-2017, 11:44 PM
hel hel is online now
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
The only document I can find that discusses the issue of civil marriages in the Church of England is in an argument against legalizing same-sex civil marriages in England; it's a 13 page document that I've only skimmed, but it has this line:



The sense that I'm getting from the overall document, but particularly from the quoted line is that the CoE recognizes all legal marriages (with the possible exception of the same-sex marriages), and as such Meghan's first marriage would still count as a divorce. That said, their stance on the remarriage of divorcees is that "No Anglican cleric can be compelled either to solemnise the marriage of any person whose former marriage has been dissolved and whose former spouse is still living, or to permit such a ceremony in the church of which he or she is the minister." Thus, no Anglican priest can be forced to marry Harry and Meghan, nor can they be forced to allow the marriage to take place in their church... but they can consent to it.

That means that if they want to get married at Westminster Abbey, it is entirely up to the Very Rev. John Hall, Dean of Westminster.

That said, given as Meghan has been divorced for a number of years now and her divorce had nothing to do with Harry, it seems unlikely that the Church isn't going to consent to the marriage (if it happens).
I agree with your assessment. Further, in a document titled "Response from the House of Bishops of the General Synod of the Church of England to the consultation on proposed changes to regulation and guidance to registration officers in respect of the content of civil marriage ceremonies", the first paragraph states:

Quote:
The Church of England recognises as legally valid all marriages which are solemnised in accordance with and recognised by the civil law of this country, whatever type of ceremony is used and irrespective of whether the marriage is one which is consistent with the Church’s teaching. (https://www.churchofengland.org/medi...ilmarriage.pdf)
Since Meghan was married in Jamaica, one has to look at whether the UK would recognize that marriage as legal. You can find that here (spoiler, the answer is yes): https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...0/marriage.pdf

Further, the CoE is quite clear that if you've been divorced, you have to have a degree nisi (final divorce) in order to have your re-marriage even considered. This is because they can't marry anyone who's not legally allowed to wed; in order to be legally allowed to wed, you can't already be married. It would be nonsensical for the CoE to require a legal document (the divorce decree) that they then pretend doesn't exist.

I've looked and I can't find anything to indicate that her first marriage doesn't "count". But I can find the texts above that indicate strongly to me that the CoE would consider her a divorced person.

I am, of course, open to correction if anyone has any sources that I haven't found.
  #4075  
Old 02-14-2017, 01:04 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 8,918
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I dimly recall that when William was planning his wedding, he was handed a list of people that he should invite to the wedding and he was not happy with it. He talked with the Queen and she said for him to trash the list and invite who he wanted to invite. I imagine it will be the same for Harry and Meghan should they marry.

They'll invite people that they want to be there first and foremost. It won't matter what walk of life or occupation but their relation to the bride and groom.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #4076  
Old 02-14-2017, 01:36 AM
eya eya is offline
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: -, Greece
Posts: 8,418
Meghan Markle high school prom photos | Daily Mail Online
  #4077  
Old 02-14-2017, 06:12 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by hel View Post
I agree with your assessment. Further, in a document titled "Response from the House of Bishops of the General Synod of the Church of England to the consultation on proposed changes to regulation and guidance to registration officers in respect of the content of civil marriage ceremonies", the first paragraph states:



Since Meghan was married in Jamaica, one has to look at whether the UK would recognize that marriage as legal. You can find that here (spoiler, the answer is yes): https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...0/marriage.pdf

Further, the CoE is quite clear that if you've been divorced, you have to have a degree nisi (final divorce) in order to have your re-marriage even considered. This is because they can't marry anyone who's not legally allowed to wed; in order to be legally allowed to wed, you can't already be married. It would be nonsensical for the CoE to require a legal document (the divorce decree) that they then pretend doesn't exist.

I've looked and I can't find anything to indicate that her first marriage doesn't "count". But I can find the texts above that indicate strongly to me that the CoE would consider her a divorced person.

I am, of course, open to correction if anyone has any sources that I haven't found.

The misinterpretation came, I believe, from a confusion with the position of the Roman Catholic Church, which does not recognize civil weddings or weddings in other churches for the purpose of determining who can wed in a Roman Catholic ceremony (hence, Letizia Ortiz for example could marry in the church even though she had had a previous civil marriage and divorce).

From the sources you quoted, however, that is clearly not the case in the CoE.
  #4078  
Old 02-14-2017, 06:48 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
And so was Camilla, who had married Andrew in the Catholic Church, not in the CoE. Yet, Camilla was denied a church wedding.
Camilla and Andrew were married at Guards Chapel, which is not a RC church.
  #4079  
Old 02-14-2017, 06:55 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,876
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post

IF there is a wedding, it will be televised IMO but it is more likely that the wedding will take place at Windsor Castle (St Georges) than Westminster Abbey. And when I say that its because of how the BRF are now (rather than in the 1980s) and also that Harry is not one for large scale, formal events.

It wont be ignored but Harry is not in the direct line (and I think he's happy about that) and therefore it will be different.

But who knows? - none of us!
I agree, I think it will be St George's, with perhaps a carriage ride through Windsor.
  #4080  
Old 02-14-2017, 06:58 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,687
So Meghan is divorced in the eyes of the church. I didn't think they would get married at the Abbey anyway but now I'm certain of it.

The Abbey is too high profile for a divorcee to marry into the BRF
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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





Popular Tags
albania best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess victoria current events denmark fashion poll 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 letizia monarchy news november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince charles prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats victoria


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 12:05 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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