Prince Harry: Relationship Suggestions and Musings 2016-2017


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course, if she is Catholic and doesn't want convert, that would be a different can of worms...

As I understand it she doesn't have to convert. They changed things...Harry would not lose his place in succession now if he marries a Catholic.

LaRae

My prediction is that when Harry marries he will have a wedding more along the lines of Zara's than Williams. Smaller, more intimate and lower key.


LaRae
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Having big a royal wedding just for the sake of it is so 20th century.

Harry's wedding will be televised, it will be attended by royals from the continent, but it won't be in front of 1900 people in Westminster Abbey like William's. Harry and William have very different destinies.

Like Skippboo said, times are different from the decadent 80s. Andrew today would only rate a wedding at St George's Chapel Windsor.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, I hope he has a big wedding, but only because the moaning, wailing, and gnashing of teeth on Twitter, etc if he doesn't get as big a wedding as William would be insufferable.
 
Zara's not a child of the Prince of Wales or a prominent Royal that the public would turn out for and wanted to see wed. And what of the bride? What if she would like a wedding in an ancient church in or near London like St George's, Windsor, or the Abbey? Meghan seems to have a wide circle of friends and so does Harry. There are his charities as well. He'd probably like representatives from them to be present.
 
Last edited:
People on Twitter don't have to pay for shutting down the center of London.
 
If Harry wishes to retain his place in the line of succession then it's not entirely his choice how long he has to wait before an engagement.

Harry need the Queen's permission to marry. It's that simple. If he marries a divorce, Catholic, American woman without his grandmother's permission then he's out of the line of succession. And while the Queen might not consider her being bi-racial, divorced, Catholic, or an American as a valid reason to deny him permission to marry (none of which really are), she is likely to consider a short relationship where the pair of them haven't even lived in the same continent a good reason.

If Harry rushes to the alter just because his biological clock is ticking then he's a fool who's destined to repeat his father's mistakes. Let him enjoy the dating stage of his relationship.

Wise and thoughtful comment. I agree with every word Ish.. The fact that she is bi-racial and Catholic and American are not things she has control over and should not be grounds to disapprove of her. However a rushed courtship full of physical attraction and passion does not bode well for a long term stable marriage.

HM is a (reputedly) wise woman full of common sense who has lived a very long life. I think she will do what she can to head off another divorce in her family.

IF Harry and Meghan are truly in love there is no rush.
 
I still don't see Harry having a wedding like Williams regardless that he's the son of the PoW. It's her second wedding. Most generally when divorcee's re-marry they do not have big productions of it. It's usually considered in bad taste. Charles didn't even get married in a Church.



LaRae
 
Charles's situation was totally different. It don't apply to Harry and Meghan.

Anyway, it's a bit to early to go into this talk right now. A courtship is taking place.
 
Harry is the most popular royal in the BRF and he is marrying an American and it's for that reason I think his wedding will be televised and it will big and some nation leaders will be invited.
 
I find it easier to end up in divorce if Harry, induced by the family, marries a empty-headed socialite
 
She wouldn't really need to convert as I understand it. Not since they change things. Harry can marry a Catholic without losing his place in the line of succesion.


LaRae

She would not need to convert to the CoE, but she would definitely need to agree to raise her children as Anglicans. This is the "fine print" that some people seem to ignore when discussing the barriers removed from Catholics marrying into the BRF.

For most devout Catholics that would be a deal-breaker but perhaps like Autumn Kelly Meghan thinks "it's all the same anyway".:cool:
 
Don't believe the marriage rumors folks. William and Catherine were due to marry hundreds of times before an announcement really came. Let's give them some time guys.
 
She would not need to convert to the CoE, but she would definitely need to agree to raise her children as Anglicans. This is the "fine print" that some people seem to ignore when discussing the barriers removed from Catholics marrying into the BRF.

For most devout Catholics that would be a deal-breaker but perhaps like Autumn Kelly Meghan thinks "it's all the same anyway".:cool:

There's that, but my gut also tells me that that the old guard would prefer to see the new rules used first on family members much lower down the line of succession. It's just very handy to set a precedent farther out of the public eye before someone as prominent as Harry does something that was prohibited for centuries.
 
People on Twitter don't have to pay for shutting down the center of London.


Is it really necessary to shut down central London?

Other people marry in Westminster Abbey without causing massive traffic jams, etc.
 
As popular as Harry is, I think the public would be very disappointed to be excluded from the goings on around his wedding. They'll want to see the bridal couple coming and going from the church and the balcony scene and in general have a wonderful day to celebrate.

I do think its much further down the line then a lot of people are perhaps expecting but one thing for sure, like all members of the royal family before him that were expected to leave the single life behind and marry, Harry will be constantly followed until the ring is on her finger (whoever she may be) and then it'll be baby bump watch time and camping out at the hospital for the birth.

People in general love this kind of stuffs.
 
I still don't see Harry having a wedding like Williams regardless that he's the son of the PoW. It's her second wedding. Most generally when divorcee's re-marry they do not have big productions of it. It's usually considered in bad taste. Charles didn't even get married in a Church.



LaRae

Both Charles and Camilla had been married previous. They both had the big church wedding. This is totally a different situation. Harry has never been married before. Neither has children. Both are younger. You will find its not taboo for second weddings to be big now a days. Meghan hasn't had a church wedding, it wouldn't be unusual even if not to Harry, her scone wedding she wanted more formal. With Charles and Camilla there was also the shadow if how they started which was a deciding factor.
 
Is it really necessary to shut down central London?

Other people marry in Westminster Abbey without causing massive traffic jams, etc.


If you want carriages, the Household Calvary, Bearskin wearing Guardsmen and marching bands, 2000 guests including foreign royals and the entire BRF , you do.
 
When we look at the Queen's children, Charles had the huge St Paul's wedding. A State occasion. Anne, Andrew and Edward all had smaller, 'lesser' weddings although still grand.

We can see the progression. I'm not suggesting Harry will get married in a tiny chapel by an Elvis impersonator but I don't think he will be given a wedding on the scale of William's just because his fans will have a meltdown if he doesn't' get it.

Just as Charles' wedding was the benchmark in the 80s, William's is the benchmark for today. I think all other weddings from here on out will be 'smaller' but still befitting the status of the individual.
 
I'd be so curious to know how much speculative "just in case" planning has already been done for the possible future wedding for Prince Harry and what scope of celebration the powers that be may have already deemed appropriate.

It seems unlikely that there hasn't been at least some degree of thinking ahead of time about would be appropriate for the second son of the heir to the throne, perhaps since he reached adulthood. After all, he's in a tricky spot, currently being of lower rank than those who've had huge public event weddings but still one of the most visible and popular royals. Sorting out what makes the most sense from the financial and PR perspectives could be a lengthy process, but this family has a history of engagements that are really only long enough if you start hiring bakers, dressmakers and florists right away.

I imagine portfolios already prepared with options (big ceremony at the Abbey with procession to Buckingham Palace, private wedding at Windsor, smaller public affair in a city other than London, etc.) complete with pro/con lists and budget proposals. Because I'm sure the Queen wants to be able to decide quickly what parameters her grandson should be given as everyone shifts into wedding planning mode, and she'll need a lot of information to make the choice.
 
People should never underestimate the costs. William was married at the height of his popularity and there were still some grumblings about the disruption of the bank holiday and the massive security costs for shutting down central London.

Charles coronation is expected to cost big bucks, so there is also that. Harry is popular, there is no doubt but there will be public comment as to why he needs a wedding on the same scale as William's given he is never going to be king.
 
When we look at the Queen's children, Charles had the huge St Paul's wedding. A State occasion. Anne, Andrew and Edward all had smaller, 'lesser' weddings although still grand.

The difference between the state weddings, like Charles and Diana's, and those of Anne (her first one), Andrew and even Princess Alexandra seems almost just semantic, really. They didn't have the laundry list of diplomatic expectations in terms of who was or wasn't invited from other nations, there weren't as many subsidiary events surrounding the actual ceremony, but they still filled the Abbey, people still lined the streets by the thousands, and the wedding parties' drives back to the palace still shut down traffic. Those were still massive and costly public events. And the thing is, if people decide they want to line up tens deep to try for a glance of Harry and his bride, the only way the powers that be can control costs are to hold the wedding in a place where it's not really possible for people to gather. If a well-loved royal marries at Westminster, they really have no option but to put a massive. expensive crowd control strategy into place. So smaller has to mean a wedding in a more controlled environment, such as Windsor, or a smaller city, like the Duke of Kent's wedding in York.
 
People should never underestimate the costs. William was married at the height of his popularity and there were still some grumblings about the disruption of the bank holiday and the massive security costs for shutting down central London.


Yes, but wouldn't the increase in tourism offset the costs?
 
That is a great point...Meghan has never been married in a Church at all...Would her marriage even be seen as "Real" to the CofE since it wasn't in a church?...
Sorry not familiar with the rules of that church...
 
Yes, but wouldn't the increase in tourism offset the costs?

But it's always a perception thing. Tabloids tend to go with '£30 million cost to tax-payer for William's wedding' and bury the tourism boost and economic spinoff.

Look at the costs for renovating BP. The Queen is immensely popular but you have senior members of the Labour party saying she should pay out of pocket for it.

Harry may get a humongous wedding but there will be newspapers and media and politicians who ask why.
 
That is a great point...Meghan has never been married in a Church at all...Would her marriage even be seen as "Real" to the CofE since it wasn't in a church?...
Sorry not familiar with the rules of that church...

A Catholic who marries in a non sacramental(civil) ceremony or who marries in another religion without Catholic consent is considered to have never been married at all.

Such marriages are invalid according to Roman Catholic canon law(see Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano's first brief civil wedding)

I am not sure if the same rules apply in the CoE but Meghan is a single woman who has never been validly married according to the Vatican.

ETA: Her status will be the same if she marries Harry in the CoE without a dispensation from her bishop
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is a great point...Meghan has never been married in a Church at all...Would her marriage even be seen as "Real" to the CofE since it wasn't in a church?...
Sorry not familiar with the rules of that church...[/QUOTE

A Catholic who marries in a non sacramental(civil) ceremony or who marries in another religion without Catholic consent is considered to have never been married at all.

Such marriages are invalid according to Roman Catholic canon law(see Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano's first brief civil wedding)

I am not sure if the same rules apply in the CoE but Meghan is a single woman who has never been validly married according to the Vatican.

ETA: Her status will be the same if she marries Harry in the CoE without a dispensation from her bishop

Lots of kids go to Catholic schools but aren't Catholic. Doesn't seem like I've seen anything indicating she's ever been a practicing Catholic.

LaRae
 
:previous:

Good point-I agree!:cool:

I just remember reading on Daily Fail that she was brought up Catholic. Which means it should be taken with the largest grain of salt possible.;)
 
Prince Harry's Christmas Gift to Meghan?

I wonder what it will be? I hear he is keen on jewelry.
 
Do you mean an engagement ring? I know we are getting so ahead of ourselves but it's so fascinating Harry has a girl im so excited!!!

YES, WE MIGHT! But I Harry may surprise those that insist it's too soon or premature during Christmas or New Years. We'll see.:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom