The Hypothetical Question of Prince William Living with his Girlfriend

[branchg]

I'm sure there is no objection to Kate "spending the night" with William at Clarence House, but I highly doubt The Queen is ready to allow it at Balmoral or Sandringham House. But as long as she is not living full-time in a royal palace, there isn't a problem.

It's nothing new and we live in a modern world after all.

 

[Claudia Lisa Remy]

I don't understand what the big deal if P.W. does live with his girlfriend. If I am not mistaken, I read that HIs Uncle Edward lived with his wife sOFIE before they got married and Edwards is the Queens' son ? Correct me if my information is Wrong? We live in the 21 century. He should have the same life most people have, even though he will be KIng one day. Why is it so easy for us to except our family, friends and neighbours down the street to live with someone and not make a big deal about it and yet, its a big deal not to except P.W. to live with Kate.?

 

[Laviollette]

September 6, 2006; The Daily Mail

Why Kate should not move in with her prince

Kate Middleton, who looked like Aphrodite's sensible younger sister in a white bikini on holiday in Ibiza, is said to be moving in with Prince William when the couple get back from a trip to Africa.

Even if their joint home turns out to be a bijou apartment in Clarence House, I can't help worrying that 24-year-old Kate is at risk of falling into the Co-habitation Trap...

full article: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.html?in_page_id=1787&in_article_id=403868

 

[Reality]

I think that Kate and william living together at this time will make it

difficult to any one even both of them to notice or feel the difference

between being married or not that`s regarding that he won`t be

married untill 30`s

 

[Oppie]

Well I guess the big problem with this whole situation is that William doesn't really live at Clarence House (he will be at Sandhurst until December(?) and then living wherever his further training is). So of course Kate is not moving in unless she is bunking in with Charles and Camilla.

and I think the person that wrote that article might have a few personal issues to work out.

 

[Skydragon]

Well I guess the big problem with this whole situation is that William doesn't really live at Clarence House (he will be at Sandhurst until December(?) and then living wherever his further training is). So of course Kate is not moving in unless she is bunking in with Charles and Camilla.

and I think the person that wrote that article might have a few personal issues to work out.

How I agree with you!

He will be at Sandhurst until December, then there is the training with his new regiment, live near or on his new base, possibly get posted.

What was even sadder were the 'comments' at the bottom of the article, boy do they all have serious issues!

 

[Jo of Palatine]

What was even sadder were the 'comments' at the bottom of the article, boy do they all have serious issues!

How right you are - what kind of world do these people live in to really fear these problems? I "tried it", too and after 4 years of "wild marriage" as we call it here in Germany, I ended up with the wedding, the ring, a son, a house and finally his inheritance when I became his widow... And now? Are they right? Am I right? Or can we just decided that the outcome depends on the individual and noone should bother giving advice when they don't know the circumstances...

 

[Luv2Cruise]

This is the 21st century, not the Victorian era, did you all miss the 60's?

Many of those who complain the loudest about this probably weren't even alive in the 80's, much less the 60's! Thank GOD for the 60's.

 

[Duchess]

How right you are - what kind of world do these people live in to really fear these problems? I "tried it", too and after 4 years of "wild marriage" as we call it here in Germany, I ended up with the wedding, the ring, a son, a house and finally his inheritance when I became his widow... And now? Are they right? Am I right? Or can we just decided that the outcome depends on the individual and noone should bother giving advice when they don't know the circumstances...

how right you are....while i don't agree that the future head of the CoE should do it...i did and so far so good. we lived together for 11 years before we married and we're still together. before people start calling me a hypocrite, i'm not now, nor was i ever the head of a church that frowns on this type of lifestyle. if william's future didn't have that responsibility then i'd say go for it and do what you like but since that's not the case i think living together would be a mistake for that reason and that reason alone.

 

[Incas]

If I'm not mistaken with history, CoE was born out of another King's desire to get rid of his wife and marry the mistress. He got his wish and then some, including a couple of heads of subsequent wives. So if anything, CoE is the biggest hypocrite of all to stake any kind of moral stand on out of wedlock living arrangement. How twisted was it to give blessing to a second marriage but not okay to officiate. (This is not about Charles-Camilla.) If William and Kate want to live together, CoE should stay out of it. As William will be its future head, they can start getting used to the future reign.

 

[Lady Bluffton]

Sorry, if they live together, they are shacking up. And their chances of getting married are slim to none. And Slim just left town...in my humble opinion. The Guardian piece had it right.

 

[Duchess]

If I'm not mistaken with history, CoE was born out of another King's desire to get rid of his wife and marry the mistress. He got his wish and then some, including a couple of heads of subsequent wives. So if anything, CoE is the biggest hypocrite of all to stake any kind of moral stand on out of wedlock living arrangement. How twisted was it to give blessing to a second marriage but not okay to officiate. (This is not about Charles-Camilla.) If William and Kate want to live together, CoE should stay out of it. As William will be its future head, they can start getting used to the future reign.

i understand where you're coming from but it doesn't change the fact that as head of the CoE he still has to represent the doctrine of the church. if the CoE wants to change it's stance on this issue then it would be fine but they haven't done that yet. i'm quite surprised the Queen has given her permission for this (if indeed she has) as you hear that she's very devoted to her faith.

 

[Elspeth]

If anyone is wondering where the digression about Henry VIII and his marital antics went, it's been moved here.

 

[Zonk]

It seems like we are getting a little head of ourselves. Unless, I missed something..Wililam is NOT the head of the CoE. And since both his father and his uncle Edward semi-lived (if that is the case here) with their significant others now spouses prior to marriage...let's not put all the shame on William. Again..there is no confirmation of William actually living with Kate. And truthfully...I am not sure if I get the same moral dilemma as everyone. I assume, everyone has a problem with them living together as its confirms that they are in fact sleeping together? Pre-martial sex..and again if you are against that..I totally understand and respect your position. BUT if that's the case...does it matter if they live together or not? And I apologize in advance, if my post offends anyone

 

[Duchess]

he may not be the head of the CoE now but he will be one day and that's the hypocritical part. the fact that his father lived with camilla out of wedlock was also wrong by virtue of the fact that he will one represent the church's stance that it's wrong to do so. i have nothing against pre marital sex or common law marriage...if you're not suppose to advocate otherwise. if william believes in common law marriage and pre marital sex then he shouldn't be the head of the CoE. he can't sit on the fence or change his mind mid stream. neither can his father and for that reason i don't believe he should be the head of CoE. but also, this is a "hypothetical" question although i respect your post, i wouldn't say that we're getting ahead of ourselves.

 

[Skydragon]

does it matter if they live together or not? And I apologize in advance, if my post offends anyone

I don't believe it matters. There are very many couples who live together, who attend CoE services on a regular basis. The church will have to change significantly in the next few years if it wants to retain any worshippers.

The belief that the Church of England is against pre marital sex or common law wives is a myth. They don't ask if you are a virgin, they don't check how many bed mates you have had and in most churches you can marry in church if you are divorced.

 

[Roslyn]

I think that if they are really serious about each other they should live together. That way, if there is some agreement that they have to wait for a period of years before marrying, they get the benefit of each other's company now and the waiting won't be so difficult. And they can get on with life instead of being pre-occupied with devising ways and means of spending the night together and worrying about photographers snapping them as they sneak about.

It'll also give everyone a good chance to know whether or the relationship will last in the long term, which I think is a concern these days.

As for the "moral" aspects as far as the Church is concerned, William has not chosen the Church as his profession. He will not become the real head of the Church like an Archbishop, but only - I've forgotten the term and because of slow dial-up I'm not going hunting for it - which is a role that he will only have because of accident of birth.

I know practising Anglicans may not approve, but I think the Church has to adopt a very liberal view of people living together in this day and age.

 

[Duchess]

good points all of them Roslyn however living together is no guarantee that a relationship will work out. as for morals, william is going to be the head of the church one day and must uphold church doctrine. i may be wrong, the CoE may not have a problem with co habiting ( i did a quick search earlier and couldn't find anything on the topic) but if they don't allow it then he must follow those rules.

 

[Rose1991]

There is no rule in the CoE that says you'r not allowed to co-habit and I have known many people at church who have lived together before marriage.

 

[Skydragon]

There is no rule in the CoE that says you'r not allowed to co-habit and I have known many people at church who have lived together before marriage.

That's right Rose1991, there is no rule that says you can't sleep around either. I too know many couples who go to church (some not very christian, IMO) and are not married and who have lived together for many years before marriage.

 

[Lady Bluffton]

By posting this message, I, in no way, shape, or form, endorse, agree with, or otherwise attempt to proselytize a particular spiritual viewpoint, but only as a "for your information". I am not Anglican.

This is from a Church of England's website (http://www.cofe.anglican.org/info/socialpublic/gsmisc729b) "The York Diocesan Synod motion on contractual relationships – A comment by the Mission and Public Affairs Council"

This document discusses the larger social issue of cohabitation, and states as follows:

"Sexual activity outside marriage, whether heterosexual or homosexual has, of course, been known throughout recorded history. Nevertheless, the almost universal Christian tradition has been to regard it as a falling short of God’s purposes for human beings. That remains the declared position of the Church of England..."

If this is the position of the CoE, can anyone comment as to Prince William's responsibilities he will one day shoulder as Head of the CoE? I am not assuming anything about his relationship with Miss Middleton...others already have.

Again, I post just in hopes of furthering the discussion.

 

[Skydragon]

If this is the position of the CoE, can anyone comment as to Prince William's responsibilities he will one day shoulder as Head of the CoE? I am not assuming anything about his relationship with Miss Middleton...others already have.

There's the rub, it falls short of perfection, it is not banned. They also go on to state:-

We support the Government’s wish to encourage long-term stable relationships as being more in the interests of society as a whole than a culture of transient or promiscuous relationships.

As always with the synod (which does not truly represent all members, look at the recent 'falling out' over gay or female clergy) they try to cover all eventualities! IMO, I believe many CoE clergy have had more than one sexual partner pre commiting themselves days.

William, if he is to be head of anything in the UK, has I think, to be relevant and that will, in the end have to include changes in the CoE.

 

[Duchess]

By posting this message, I, in no way, shape, or form, endorse, agree with, or otherwise attempt to proselytize a particular spiritual viewpoint, but only as a "for your information". I am not Anglican.



..."Sexual activity outside marriage, whether heterosexual or homosexual has, of course, been known throughout recorded history. Nevertheless, the almost universal Christian tradition has been to regard it as a falling short of God’s purposes for human beings. That remains the declared position of the Church of England..."

thanks for finding this Lady Bluffton. until the CoE decides to change it's position and because the above is their "declared position" i think it should be also be what william endorses and also what his father should have done. if the church decided to accept otherwise then, IMO, william would be able to live with kate, outside of marriage, without and problems.

 

[sashajones]

I think that its a good idea to live with a person before marriage. It give you a chance to really get to know that person.

 

[Skydragon]

and because the above is their "declared position"

I would suggest you read the entire article, as it would be an absolute saint who manages to fulfill 'Gods purposes for human beings'. Of course anyone can interpret it as they see fit, but as a large portion IMO, of people in the CoE have no problem with William sleeping with his girlfriend then who are we to give him rules and regulations.

I believe the teaching of the CoE also suggest tolerance, forgiveness and acceptance of others ideas and ideals, but apparently these attributes are only to be followed by William! Practise what you preach might be a good idea for some of us!

 

[Royal Fan]

If "Activity" is the Issue then they could have different rooms

 

[bekalc]

I think that if they are really serious about each other they should live together. That way, if there is some agreement that they have to wait for a period of years before marrying, they get the benefit of each other's company now and the waiting won't be so difficult. And they can get on with life instead of being pre-occupied with devising ways and means of spending the night together and worrying about photographers snapping them as they sneak about.

It'll also give everyone a good chance to know whether or the relationship will last in the long term, which I think is a concern these days.

As for the "moral" aspects as far as the Church is concerned, William has not chosen the Church as his profession. He will not become the real head of the Church like an Archbishop, but only - I've forgotten the term and because of slow dial-up I'm not going hunting for it - which is a role that he will only have because of accident of birth.

I know practising Anglicans may not approve, but I think the Church has to adopt a very liberal view of people living together in this day and age.

I think the whole waiting for marriage thing is a bit ridiculous myself. They've been dating for how many years? Surely by now they would know if they want to live the rest of their life together or not...

The church really doesn't have to adopt a liberal view to survive, in fact the Churches that are adapting liberal views, are the Churches that are actually dying. They are the ones who are losing members. The Anglican Church is growing the fast in Asia and in Africa, and those areas they don't take to kindly towards "the more liberalizing view."

A lot of us don't choose our religion because we want "anything goes" spirtuality. We choose our religion because we want morals and guidance to live our lives.

As for William, speaking as a Catholic, I would say perhaps William really shouldn't be the head of the Church anyways! I realize we Catholics have had problems with our leaders too, but at least our leaders choose to be the heads of Churches/ and have to keep some form of appearance.

 

[Duchess]

I think the whole waiting for marriage thing is a bit ridiculous myself. They've been dating for how many years? Surely by now they would know if they want to live the rest of their life together or not...

The church really doesn't have to adopt a liberal view to survive, in fact the Churches that are adapting liberal views, are the Churches that are actually dying. They are the ones who are losing members. The Anglican Church is growing the fast in Asia and in Africa, and those areas they don't take to kindly towards "the more liberalizing view."

A lot of us don't choose our religion because we want "anything goes" spirtuality. We choose our religion because we want morals and guidance to live our lives.

As for William, speaking as a Catholic, I would say perhaps William really shouldn't be the head of the Church anyways! I realize we Catholics have had problems with our leaders too, but at least our leaders choose to be the heads of Churches/ and have to keep some form of appearance.

i'd have agree with you on this. if william is going to be the head of the church then he should up hold it's doctrine. if he doesn't want to uphold it's doctrine then he shouldn't be head of the church.

 

[TonyaR]

i'd have agree with you on this. if william is going to be the head of the church then he should up hold it's doctrine. if he doesn't want to uphold it's doctrine then he shouldn't be head of the church.

I think that if Prince William's Uncle Edward can live with his girlfriend for 5 years in Clarence House without the ceiling falling in, then William can too. Sauce for the goose and all that. Why should William have to be denied something that has already been given to another member of his family?

On the other hand, I really hope Kate has enough sense not to do this unless they are actually engaged.

In all honesty I doubt William would ask Kate to live with him unless he knew for sure that he wanted to marry her, and since according to all sources he hasn't yet made up his mind I don't think she will be moving into Clarence House anytime soon.

If she is truly living there now, then we should all assume an engagement announcement will be made at some point in the future, and treat their engagement as an established fact.
I guess the point I'm making here is that an engagement is a betrothal, and gives the couple more leeway with premarital relations (so to speak).

 

[Warren]

This thread has veered well off track, and perhaps because there is nothing new to add to what has already been said in the preceding 21 pages, we are now entering the field of religious debate.

As a result the thread is being closed for review by the British Moderating Team.

Warren
British Forums moderator

......................................

The posts debating religious beliefs and theology have been removed.
Since this thread is based on an erroneous report published in August 2005 and there is nothing to be added, it will remain closed for the time being.